What God Has Invented, Man Has Polluted

Great post Cal. Keep up the good work.

"God does not demand we follow him, he asks us to. We are free to accept or reject that offer. "

AND IF YOU REJECT HIS OFFER???

HELL FIRE & DAAAMNATION FOR ETEEERNITY!!!!

Greg,

"God was testing his faithfulness by asking him to sacrifice his son. He was not manipulating anything."

Regardless of God's intentions, if I had been Abraham I would have felt manipulated. Even if I agreed with you about testing, it is wrong to use the life of someone's child for such a test, even if it's God who is doing the test.

"It all comes down to choice."

Under Christian doctrine, there is no real choice because God holds the threat of hell over humans' heads. That is simply trying to scare people into obedience. That would be like me using capital punishment to discipline my children.

Hey Greg,
did you just copy and paste that whole response? Seems I have read it before...............

Tonio posted the following in the ()

("How do you prove someone is faithful to you? You test them. That's what God did, and they passed with flying colors."

Greg, what God did with Abraham was not "testing." It was a deliberate manipulation of Abraham's sense of reality. How was Abraham supposed to know what was real and what was illusion? If you doubt the evidence of your own senses, you lose all sense of safety and security.)

OK we’re not going to agree on this point I think. God was testing his faithfulness by asking him to sacrifice his son. He was not manipulating anything. He did not force Abraham to do anything he was not willing to do. Interesting how God did sacrifice his OWN son in the NT.

("No, because the parent sees the big picture and knows that the shot is ultimately for the child's best interest, even though the child does not understand that fact."

That is a huge reason why I am repelled by much of Christian doctrine.

First, the way I read that sentence, I will never be considered an adult, no matter how much I demonstrate responsibility or emotional maturity. )

Now you’re talking about spiritual maturity I think, which is different from physical maturity. Spiritual maturity comes from walking the walk and not just reading the Bible and talking the talk. God does not want spiritual babies, He wants mature Christians who will go and fulfill Matthew 25 etc… [sheep and goats]. The book of Hebrews makes this point. Personally I am probably a teenager, I know enough to know I have a long way to go. God does have a plan for us and when we have the faith to follow that plan He richly rewards us. It does not mean we get fooled or that we’re going to have an easy life, it does mean that he’ll not abandon us in the storms.

(Second, the most terrifying thing I can image is living under the absolute power of another being, especially a being that may be irrational and insanely jealous and prone to fits of rage. Authority in our world is never absolute, not even that of a parent over a child, and that is the way it should be. I have zero confidence that any being with absolute power would not use that power to satisfy its own wants at my expense.)

God does not demand we follow him, he asks us to. We are free to accept or reject that offer. We have the gift of free will, we are always faced with choices, some easy some difficult. With those choices come consequences some good, some bad. And unlike humans where absolute power corrupts absolutely, God’s nature does not change. Now I am not a bible scholar so my knowledge is limited, and I’ll be the first to admit ignorance if I don’t have an answer.

(Finally, an adult freely accepts the authority of an employer or a government, and the person or people with that authority definitely exist. And that power relationship is one of mutual benefit for both sides. Religions presuppose the existence of an all-powerful authority figure or figures, with no evidence other that some person's claims. To me, that is like someone barging into my life, claiming to be my parent, and threatening to kill me if I don't do exactly what the person says. While I don't automatically reject the idea of deity, I do reject the idea that I should regard deity as an authority based solely on someone's claims.)

Jesus does not barge in, he knocks and asks if you’ll follow Him. And with Jesus, it’s about relationship, not religion. That’s one of the major problems with Christianity, many think it’s the other way around and history proves the folly in that belief. And we do benefit from this kind of faith. God benefits because His people are ministering to the ‘least of these’, and bringing more people to Him [without bible bashing] we benefit because when our time on earth is at an end, we get eternal relationship with Him and His Father.

It all comes down to choice.

Right on Gaby!!

I knew I wasn't full of crap!

Only sometimes I am, but I rarley admit it.

BRAMBLETON,

I couldn't find a biblical passage that condones sex with animals, but it surely must have existed. Why else would there be this passage in Exodus: "22:19 Whosoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death."

Obviously even back then there were some pretty sick puppies around.

The incest part was already addressed so I don't have anything to add.

What do you love Lori? Your post made no sense

Hi RUSSELL D. and BYRONE!

"Thanks, Russell. I'd like to buy you a beer too. Maybe if we have enough of them, we can figure out how to get it through people's heads that they don't need religion to love life and love God. Either way, we'll have a good time! Peace, brother."

I'll buy you both a beer (and myself too)! I figured it out a long time ago and am much happier for it! Organized religion has little to do with faith and everything to do with dogma and rituals. I don't need either to believe in God.

CWS wrote:
---Is the Bible the perfect and complete word of God? Sadly, cherry picking seems to be the deFacto choice of most Christians and scholars.---

I find cherry-picking the choice of almost all religions. If you think its only christians, take a look at the Muslims these days. And what I find VERY annoying is the quotes from the bible where at times the quote is taken out of context.

But I do find it refreshing that some christians are finally asking the right question "What would Jesus do?". I know, its overused and used comically at times but I find it the most important thing for any christian to consider. If you only refer to the bible you can only deal with things God or Jesus delt with and was written down, hopefully accurately. Everything else is just up in the air unless you ask that question. And the bible allows slavery and other acts we today would throw people in jail for, and, I think we can all assume, Jesus would be against though he never spoke against it and God spoke for it.

I find it funny but typical that Cal only uses one quote from the bible to make his point, a quote that has no direct bearing on this subject but IMPLIES God has some rules about sex. The rest of Cal's essay has no references, just what Cal thinks the bible and Jesus support. This is the danger of religion, following those who claim to know the bible but really know little or make it up as they go along. You see, the bible is not where people put their trust, except for those who read it and understand it, which is a minority of christians. Most christians putall of their faith in the people who claim the moral authority of the bible. If you don't know how dangerous that can be, ask any former Catholic alter boy.

Check this out:

"I thought you'd proclaim something like God created MAN out of thin air with no SEX mentioned in Da Bible...God created WOMAN out of rib - no SEX mentioned in Da Bible. God created Jesus -- well God only knows how -- but no SEX is mentioned anywhere...Ergo, it follows that Christians have a special relationship with the Earth and should not screw the environment...
That's how your "logic" travels usually go..."

Which is better: to offer sound reason for one's own view or assassinating those of another without offering any rationale or information.

The Bible is very clear about Jesus' genesis. Old Testament prophecies made it clear that the Messiah would be of Jewish ancestry, specifically from 'the line of David.' His virgin birth only implies that there was solely a female genetic donor. If scientists didn't believe it were possible, they wouldn't spend so much money and try so hard to replicate it!!!

P.S.- The Bible does NOT say that woman came from man's rib but rather from his side. Perhaps the Bible journaled stem cell cloning long before scientific journals did! Once again, looks like God is far ahead of the game!

Ha I love it!!!

A few of you touched on an interesting point.

Do Christians regard the Old Testament as completely true and worthy? Or should we be allowed to cherry pick?

Or as some, perhaps many Christians contend, does Jesus and the NT eliminate the importance of the OT? Is the Bible the un-erring word of God? Should it be interpreted?

It seems to me before any quality discussion on the Bible or God for that matter we must eatablish those ground rules first.

Is/was God all-knowing and All-powerful?

Is the Bible the perfect and complete word of God?

Sadly, cherry picking seems to be the deFacto choice of most Christians and scholars.

There are scores and scores of oddities, rules and docterine (stonings, "unclean females", eating shrimp, etc, etc.)from Leviticus and the OT which are never adhered (sp) to by modern Christians (and never would be). Yet they are in the Bible...GOD's WORD and all. There is seemingly little thought or concern on this matter within the mainstream Catholics, Protestants or the emerging "Evangelical" movement.

I find this lack of thought strange.

Greg:

A minor historical point: a number of medieval heresies (What else to call them? "Protestant" would be confusing. "Schismatic" is another church term. Since "heresy" comes from a Greek word meaning "choice," I go with that.) rejected the OT in toto (except for a few passages they happened to like). The Catholic Church just hated that. But then, the Catholic Church lives by making laws, doesn't it? And the OT is certainly full of laws, isn't it?

NOSEMAJD:

Credit-where-credit-is-due department: Your platoon sergeant's remark was a originally a Woody Allen joke: "Sex is dirty. If you do it right."

Russell D.:

I assure that by "30 or so years ago," public lynching was well over. Public lynchings were an early twentieth century phenomenon. Even by the 1950's, lynchings were mostly held late at night far back in the woods. By 1977, lynchings of any kind were unheard of.

"How do you prove someone is faithful to you? You test them. That's what God did, and they passed with flying colors."

Greg, what God did with Abraham was not "testing." It was a deliberate manipulation of Abraham's sense of reality. How was Abraham supposed to know what was real and what was illusion? If you doubt the evidence of your own senses, you lose all sense of safety and security.

"No, because the parent sees the big picture and knows that the shot is ultimately for the child's best interest, even though the child does not understand that fact."

That is a huge reason why I am repelled by much of Christian doctrine.

First, the way I read that sentence, I will never be considered an adult, no matter how much I demonstrate responsibility or emotional maturity.

Second, the most terrifying thing I can image is living under the absolute power of another being, especially a being that may be irrational and insanely jealous and prone to fits of rage. Authority in our world is never absolute, not even that of a parent over a child, and that is the way it should be. I have zero confidence that any being with absolute power would not use that power to satisfy its own wants at my expense.

Finally, an adult freely accepts the authority of an employer or a government, and the person or people with that authority definitely exist. And that power relationship is one of mutual benefit for both sides. Religions presuppose the existence of an all-powerful authority figure or figures, with no evidence other that some person's claims. To me, that is like someone barging into my life, claiming to be my parent, and threatening to kill me if I don't do exactly what the person says. While I don't automatically reject the idea of deity, I do reject the idea that I should regard deity as an authority based solely on someone's claims.

Greg - I appreciate your explanation and examples.

I still wonder how you know these things. Are they in the bible, or did you learn this in Church or some other way?

You mention that stoning is out - what about the strictures against homosexuals? Isn't a lot of that stuff in the same section of Leviticus?

In terms of God testing Abraham - I understand the idea of testing faith, but it seems like God could have found a way to do it without traumatizing Abraham's son into thinking his father was about to murder him. Hard to imagine father and son had a very trusting relationship after that.

Then in the New Testament, this same God becomes a father himself and sets his own son up to be sacrificed -- and actually goes through with it this time.

Luckily, he isn't dead for long. Now his followers celebrate by symbolically eating his body and drinking his blood.

When I was growing up, all of this seemed very natural to me - This story was so second nature, that I don't remember when I heard it for the first time.

Now it seems pretty gruesome.

The origin of all religions, in three panels:

Panel 1: Two cave-men stand looking at the sun. One says to the other, "How DOES that thing make it clear across the sky every damn day?" The 2nd cave-man replies (with a sneaky smile on his face) "Well, don't you know ole Grag that stopped moving a few years ago, and we put him in that hole? Well, he climbed back out, jumped up there and started yanking that yellow thing across the sky every day."

Panel 2: First cave-man says, "Damn, I bet you're right! Gotta go tell the others!" And he runs off.

Panel 3: Second cave-man laughs, then gets a serious look on his face and says: "You know, there could be some money in this!"

Hi Tonio,

Forgive me for not reading all of the posts here, so I have not traced the current conversation back to its origin. However, concerning God's testing of Abraham and Job, you stated that "it's wrong for a being to deliberately test another being like that."

Based on your statement, may I suggest that it is only wrong if the two beings are equal in nature. However, the God of the Bible (OT & NT) is shown to be the all-wise Creator of man, an infinitely higher being than we are. Isaiah 40:12-31 offers a compelling comparison between the nature of man and the nature of God, and concludes that the nations of the world are like a speck of dust on the scales compared to God. God's ways are higher than our ways and His thoughts are higher than our thoughts. He can see the big picture when we see only a small speck of time. He knows that we must endure suffering at times in order to become more dependent upon Him and to become better human beings because of it. But, it doesn't feel like it at the time, that's for sure. It's not pleasant and it doesn't seem fair.

Perhaps a human example will offer a better way to illustrate this point. When folks have a baby, they take the little one to the doctor on numerous occasions, often to receive immunizations, which are painful to the child. As the child grows older, he/she begins to plead with the parent not to go to the doctor because the shot is going to hurt. That's all that the child is focused on: the pain. The parent, who is much wiser than the child, knows that the child needs the immunization in order to stay healthy and avoid more serious illnesses. But because the shot is painful, should the parent instead give in to the child? No, because the parent sees the big picture and knows that the shot is ultimately for the child's best interest, even though the child does not understand that fact. The same is true for God. In his infinite wisdom, He sees the big picture and that certain character traits can only be developed through trials and yes, suffering. Ultimately, it is for our good and His glory.

I hope this helps.

Have a wonderful weekend everyone!

That is an interesting point. How else would you test someone's faith, a true false quiz? How do you prove someone is faithful to you? You test them. That's what God did, and they passed with flying colors. God could have manipulated them to make them pass but he allowed them to choose. We test the faithfulness of people all the time. Would you marry someone who was unfaithful? Would you go into business with someone who was unfaithful?

Greg, what I'm saying is that it's wrong for a being to deliberately test another being like that. That has nothing to do with proving faith and everything to do with manipulation for its own sake.

God was testing Abraham's and Job's faith to Him. Both were richly rewarded for staying true to their faith. I've been tested by God a couple of times and I am stronger for it.

Jesus never never promised an easy life, He did promise that God would not abandon us.

I'm not enough of an expert on the Bible to talk about Jonah and conquering the promised land so I'm not even going to hazard a guess.

"There are parts though that got overruled. Things like diet, circumcision stoning adulterers etc., no longer apply to Christians because of Jesus and his ministry."

Greg, I can understand that teaching, although I stress that it may not be obvious to casual readers of the Bible. Instead, my issue is with God's behavior in the Old Testament. A God that would play sick mind games with Abraham and Job and that would order Joshua to commit genocide, does not sound like a being that is capable of unconditional love. Emotional torture and mass slaughter are unacceptable under any circumstances. Ascribing these atrocities to God doesn't make them acceptable.

"E Favorite:
Hello Greg, you say:

“Leviticus is not my favorite book in the Bible because so much of it has been overruled by the new testament. When I do read it and see things that seem to be at odds with the NT I go and make sure. If it does conflict then I ignore it, because Jesus is the new convenent that replaced the old one.”

I’m not well schooled in the Bible. I have trouble reading it in English, not to mention Hebrew, Greek or Latin. So I have some questions for you and others who know about the Bible -- How much of the OT is overruled by the NT? How do you know which parts are ruled out? Does it say somewhere in the NT which parts to ignore? If those guidelines are not in the NT, how do you determine what to accept or not accept?

Regarding the New Covenant, what does that mean regarding the authority of the OT? If the new covenant really replaced the old one, why is the OT still part of the Christian Bible?

Thanks, I look forward to your responses."

Much of the Old Testament does line up with the New Testament, but there are parts that don't. Jesus summed up everything is just a couple of verses.

This is from Matthew 22 verses 34-40

34Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. 35One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question:
36"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" 37Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.'[b] 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'[c] 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

That in a nutshell is Christianity. If you see something in the OT that does not line up with this then you can probably ignore it. Jesus's whole ministry was about reaching out to the lost the broken and the hurting. He was often found dinning amoung people that the religious leaders of the day (Pahrasees) would not give the time of day to. That's what Christians are SUPPOSED to do. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%2025:31-46;&version=31;
That passage sums up how Christians are supposed to help the hurting, lost and the hungry. It's worth the read.

Here is another passage that illustrates the fact that the NT is a new covenant and supercedes the old.

This is from the book of Hebrews chaper 8

1The point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, 2and who serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by man.
3Every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices, and so it was necessary for this one also to have something to offer. 4If he were on earth, he would not be a priest, for there are already men who offer the gifts prescribed by the law. 5They serve at a sanctuary that is a copy and shadow of what is in heaven. This is why Moses was warned when he was about to build the tabernacle: "See to it that you make everything according to the pattern shown you on the mountain."[a] 6But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better promises.

7For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. 8But God found fault with the people and said[b]:
"The time is coming, declares the Lord,
when I will make a new covenant
with the house of Israel
and with the house of Judah.
9It will not be like the covenant
I made with their forefathers
when I took them by the hand
to lead them out of Egypt,
because they did not remain faithful to my covenant,
and I turned away from them, declares the Lord.
10This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel
after that time, declares the Lord.
I will put my laws in their minds
and write them on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.
11No longer will a man teach his neighbor,
or a man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,'
because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest.
12For I will forgive their wickedness
and will remember their sins no more."[c]

13By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.
"

My references are from biblegateway.com, and they have the bible translated into many different different languages.

The old testament is still valuable to Christians, many of the lessons in the OT are still applicable to Christians today. That's why it's part of the bible. There are parts though that got overruled. Things like diet, circumcision stoning adulturers etc., no longer apply to Christians because of Jeus and his ministry.

I did it again -- my first sentence should start, "I have never understood why..."

I have understood why anyone's sexual orientation should be other people's concern. People in committed monogamous relationships, regardless of orientation, pose no intrinsic harm to others or to society. I have never heard of gays warning straights of eternal damnation if they don't "join the gay team."

Brambleton wrote:
--God hates the "sin" of man, God doesn't hate man.---

Yet God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah killing every "sinner" which must have included all the children in those towns (bad boys and girls?) as well as all the fetuses in the preganant women (must have been many of them!). I would conclude from that event that God really did HATE these people enough to kill them and their children born and unborn. Guess he was in a less than merciful mood that day.

---God did not create any human being as a homosexual.---

How do you know? Please go to your bible and reference where it says God made all men and women heterosexual. And while you're at it, explain why Christ reached the ripe age of 30 without getting married. That was very unusual for a jew in those days.

---People become homosexuals because they yield to abnormal acts or lust.---

And you determined this how? How do you explain lustful people that stay heterosexual and never consider homosexuality? Do you think lust leads to homosexuality? If so where did you learn this?

---Though people are not born homosexuals, the Bible does say that ALL human beings are born with a sin nature. If we yield to the evils of the flesh (and don't take that to mean sex is bad) it will lead to our own personal destruction not only in this life, but in the life to come.---

I'll take that to mean that anything in excess is probably not good. But you don't need to be homosexual to be lustful, have casual sex or "yield to the evils of the flesh". Many who are homosexual actually live in monogomous relationships. Sex causing problems in not a homo/hetero issue. And since you brought it up, consider your own sinful nature and that your agitation with homosexuals is itself sinful since you are not doing Gods commandsment of loving your neighbor as yourself.

JH wrote:
---My hat's off to you [Cal]! Society today is so immoral! I am truly scared for these people without God in their life!---

Here in lies a big problem, fear of those not like yourself. Its called bigotry.

---I pray that the Holy Spirit moves in the lives of the non-believers!---

Do you mean "hope" or "pray", because if you meant "pray", then you believe you can summon God when you want to do your bidding. Do you believe you can do that? Do you believe God is a sword you can wield?

---The Bible is the "Word" and we all should be living by it!---

Who is to say we are not? Does one need to believe in God to live by the "Word"? Does one need to believe in God to have a normal sex life in marriage? Its funny how bigots assume a lot about people based on one trait, in this case, their religious belief. I guess the pedophile priests or homosexual daliances of Haggert and the many preachers who praise God while having extramarital affairs have not made you consider that we are all the same. Call us all children of God if you like. But we are all the same and only you labeling and separating people by their belief makes us different.

---Look at society today verses 15-20 years ago! I don't even want my children to watch t.v. these days!---

20 years ago was 1987. You say things are worse today? I don't see much difference. Maybe you went from TV over the air, which is heavily regulated, to cable TV, which, since YOU are paying for it, is not as regulated. Much of what is on TV today is re-runs from 1987 (Seinfeld?). And when has TV been a good thing to watch. I remember cigarette ads on TV years ago. Were those good days?

---WAKE UP AMERICA!---

Stop blaming America for what you perceive as problems in society. You should look to see whether your religion actually makes for a better life. Start with the jails and see how many christians are there. It might surprise you to know that atheists make up the smallest percentage of the prison population when compared with the regular population. But hey, I'm not advocating atheism, just pointing out that christianity does not seem to make for a better person. Maybe you should consider that christianity is part of the problem ... no, on second thought I doubt you will. Free will only goes so far, eh?

There is no god. Get over it.

Thank you Russell D, I know I'm not alone in my thoughts - you have put them into words for me.

For me there is no god, except the god that man has made for his own uses. To foster hope and friendship and love.
And to foster prejudice, hate and guilt.

I need no god to know what love and loyalty and honesty is. I need no god to teach me hate and dispare and guilt.
I choose to love and accept everyone for who they are and how they treat others around them. Not how, when, why they have sex.
I choose not to be put into a box that religon wants to put you in. Nor do I choose to place others in that same box because some religon tells us to.

I choose no god, no religon. When death closes my eyes forever I know my sleep will be the deepest nothingness known. And I'm fine with that.

Brambleton,

"God did not create any human being as a homosexual."

No, he didn't - he was absent at the creation.

But evolution and biology did.

Brambleton,

Ok, I am gonna have to disagree with you there, on the whole homosexual aspect. Being gay is not a choice, it is who a person is. It is as natural as heterosexualtiy. God never said anything about being gay as sin. A homophobic writer did. Jesus never said anything about it. Jesus was the man, he loved everybody. I think we can learn more from life through the teachings of Jesus than we can from what some people 2,000 years ago believe God would want us to do. I have gay and lesbian frineds. they are the most wonderful people to be around. Why you ask? Because they are not afraid to be who they are. they enjoy life, and yes they might even believe in God. And just a tip, if you ever want to meet women, hang out with a gay man, they know plenty of women to introduce you to.

I also have one other question.......if you watch porn, and I don't know if you do, I assume you don't watch man on man porn, but you'll slow mow the woman on woman porn, am I right? So what the difference? the beauty of the women? And let me ask this also......when watching regular straight porn, do you expect to see a man with no hard on or with? Hmmmmm, think about that.

I'd still buy you a beer though

Hello Greg, you say:

“Leviticus is not my favorite book in the Bible because so much of it has been overruled by the new testament. When I do read it and see things that seem to be at odds with the NT I go and make sure. If it does conflict then I ignore it, because Jesus is the new convenent that replaced the old one.”

I’m not well schooled in the Bible. I have trouble reading it in English, not to mention Hebrew, Greek or Latin. So I have some questions for you and others who know about the Bible -- How much of the OT is overruled by the NT? How do you know which parts are ruled out? Does it say somewhere in the NT which parts to ignore? If those guidelines are not in the NT, how do you determine what to accept or not accept?

Regarding the New Covenant, what does that mean regarding the authority of the OT? If the new covenant really replaced the old one, why is the OT still part of the Christian Bible?

Thanks, I look forward to your responses.

DW:

Good effort with the Romans passage but you're missing the point. God hates the "sin" of man, God doesn't hate man. God did not create any human being as a homosexual. People become homosexuals because they yield to abnormal acts or lust. Though people are not born homosexuals, the Bible does say that ALL human beings are born with a sin nature. If we yield to the evils of the flesh (and don't take that to mean sex is bad) it will lead to our own personal destruction not only in this life, but in the life to come.

Romans 8:1-15

Ok, I'll admit, the sex with animals was a little off, but I am not taking back the incest part. If yuo can't find it, you don't read well enouhg into the words of the Bible. Adam and Eve first had son, right? One is killed by the other and the other is now an outcast. Adam and Eve then have daughters..........the sons get with the daughters: hmmmm, sounds like incest to me. But oh well, who cares, its not important.

As for Byrone, Brambleton, and Ashley.......all I have to say is one thing-KARAOKE!!!!! We can have a good ole time and not be pressured by the overbearing religious right.

I truly enjoy these discussions because it allows people to voice what they think without repercussions. Now I know sex is a major issue, but you know what? Who cares? If I see sex one way, then another person sees it another way. That is what makes this place so great, the diversity. The only problem with that is the people who seem to think it is their duty to convert me and my way of thinking to theirs or else I am going to Hell. You need to remember, Heaven and Hell are manmade concepts. They are what you make them. Heck, I consider Pizza "food of the Gods"(I really said that last night). So look at it this way....the mind is an incredible thing, it can create, destroy, and conjure up things that are a total mystery to any other.
I leave with one last thinking point- God didn't make Man, Man made God......

My old Friend, it is good to see you again. Welcome back. I hope you are well.
Tis true that God's way is always the best way, but the flesh is weak and all that man touches he or she pollutes. So how can one have sex without pollution? Through Love. Something that can not be made by the hands. It must be made within the heart and communicated by the heart. I most recently had a very public heart rending, and it was not because of my intentions to commit an act of Sex, but because I wanted to commit acts of kindness and friendship. Most certainly, those I most cared to contact colluded to draw me out of my way into the trap. But when the realities of my oath of celibacy pursuant to the murder of Saddam Hussein become public knowlege...40 days and 40 nights renewed once upon my birthday January 13th the folly and polluted nature of the trap itself only serves to trap the wicked, not me. God/Allah is Great. It is great to consider you my Friend. I hope you feel as I do. You know from the days of the Weird Harrold that I like to write and play with words. You know that rhymes I like to show, but not off. God Bless you and yours my good fire-friend. Amen. Good to see you again... P.S., I DO NOT ACCEPT THEIR "LESSON", NOR "HAIR CUT" NOR "SHAVE" NOR "ATTEMPT AT CONTRO" FOR IT IS ALL AN ILLUSION OF THEIR OWN MAKING. GOD KNOWS MY TRUTH AND IT HAS SET ME FREE.

Mr. Thomas,

I agree with most of the points you made in your article. Sex has given birth to at least one major disease, and other minor diseases in the past years. It still amazes me that people can actually die from having sex. I know the possibility of death, insanity, etc.. was always there from having sex, but nothing like it is today. Its hard to realize that at one time man nor woman had to worry about catching a disease from a sexual act. And yes we as people have made sex dangerous. And yes, I do believe its due to our Ego, or as you say "I". I think it is healthy and a good moral choice for people who want to remain chaste before marriage, and faithful during marriage. I will have to agree with the scientist who say that sex will become even more dangerous in the future, that we are only begining to see some of the problems that we as a species have created because of our greed. For some of us from the 60s and 70s our legacy of "free love, and drugs" have come home to roost. My grown children often ask me; "What were yall thinking about for Gods Sake?" I tell her "Me, Myself, and I".

Hey BA'AL,
Nice to see you around again. Leviticus is not my favorite book in the Bible because so much of it has been overruled by the new testament. When I do read it and see things that seem to be at odds with the NT I go and make sure. If it does conflict then I ignore it, because Jesus is the new convenent that replaced the old one. So those passages you picked out are not relavent to Christians because they go against the NT.

TDAY

On the contrary, the sections in Leviticus that I quoted meant exactly what they said. If you would like, I could translate them for you from the original Hebrew. Mud on my face Tday? I don't think so.

Obviously, the vast majority of us would find rules like these which I mentioned in Leviticus to be absurd, unless Tday, you like the idea of making bondsmen of the strangers in your midst.

But the rules people like Cal Thomas throw at us are equally arbitrary.

Cal, you speak the truth.

"All sin – whether sexual, or something else – is the result of man thinking he knows better than God. Sin’s middle letter is “I.” I will do what I want. I know better than God. I will be the master of my own destiny." --- Thomas

SIN, if I remember correctly, means to "miss the mark of perfection".

If you consider God = perfection, then I agree with you.

Thomas sounds silly to anyone who is not obsessed with the supernatural. The same people who think that it's lunacy to hold seances to connect with the dead think it's perfectly fine to conjure a supernatural being that invents things to keep fences around us. But I digress from my point:

Sexual reproduction is found in all groups of animals, save for one class of rotifers. Sex is not necessary to produce new members of any species, nor is it involved in the physical pleasure of animals that release gametes into the sea, nor is it the mirror of anything supernatural for flatworms or barnacles.

It has evolved and been maintained in organisms (not just humans, Cal) for one reason: to produce genetic variation in offspring. In fact, there is a genetic cost to diluting one's contribution each generation, so the benefits must be pretty powerful to maintain it so widely.

Understanding how it came to be, of course, doesn't explain its significance to human adults, which varies among human cultures. But in the context of what we actually understand about sexual reproduction, rather than the stuff preachers want to make up about it, it seems goofy to talk about sex like it was sent to humans from heaven.

"Only someone who is really looking to be mocked quotes from Leviticus. Here is part of it that says that God finds childbirth sinful."

Ba'al stated the quote above.

This shows, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that those who defy God and think they know what they are saying fall flat on their faces. Anyone who has studied the bible objectively and honestly knows what the sin offering was for. It was not for giving childbirth. The sin offering was common, for the forgivness of all sins. A common thing just as, in a new testament light, those who believe and are consistently on their knees asking God, in the name of Jesus Christ (who replaced the ORDINANCES..not the law) for forgivness of their sins.

If those who defy the bible wish to claim they know what it is talking about, a little advice: do a little more study to avoid mud on your face.

Brambleton asks above:

"Joe Campbell,

I must have missed the book in the Bible that condones "hating gays". Could you please point me in the right direction? Thanks! "

Of course, scripture does not promote hate of homosexuals, but it certainly shows, yea many, many years ago, that the practice of such leads to a penalty.

Romans 1:22-27

Russel D. and Byrone are my heroes! I'm eternally grateful to find others who think as I do without giving in to the hate so prevalent when discussions of religion and sex come up. I'll buy you both a drink.

Sex is a beautiful thing, no matter who invented it. But people tend to look at it as an "either-or" situation: either you're married and honoring God with your sexuality, or you're engaging in casual sex with all comers. People like myself are in the middle; they have sex before or between marriages (whole 'nother issue) in committed relationships that don't always lead to marriage, but that doesn't mean we'll sleep with anyone. Please consider the middle position, and try to remember that we're not mocking the insitution of marriage by our choices; we're simply living our lives.

I'll respect you and not mock your position as long as you respect me and don't shake your head and say I'm beyond all redemption because I don't tie my decisions to words written by other human beings -- divinely inspired or not.

Byrone,

Thanks for taking the time to respond. I guess I don't have the same view of religion that you do, although I have to admit I've never really given "religion" much thought. One of the things God calls on us to do is fellowship with one another. If we praise God only by ourselves, we miss this calling. I am Baptist and attend Baptist services. But friends of mine are also Lutheran, Methodist, Catholic, Presbyterian, etc., etc. While my friends and I can disagree on certain interpretations of scripture, we generally are committed to the same one, true, living God. My relationship to God is first and foremost. My affiliation to the Baptist theology only stems from what my relationship with God has provided me.

I'm always up for a beer! Or wine for that matter. Just need to make sure I don't give in to "drunkeness and lewd behavior"!

Ba'al,

Does it make you feel superior to mock others? I believe what the animals and Adam were lacking were fellowship and intimacy. If you would like to infer that there was some sort of sexual relationship, well, your loss.

Joe Campbell,

I must have missed the book in the Bible that condones "hating gays". Could you please point me in the right direction? Thanks!

Sorry bout that last part. Meant to say much respect to you, BRAMBLETON, let's have a beer with Russell. It's been a loooooong day!

Brambleton,

You are obviously an intelligent person. I will answer, but please don't take any offense, as I mean none. God is bigger than any religion. You can talk to God as easily as I or anyone else on this planet. So where does the neccessity for religion come into play? If you have an honest, open conversation with God, why do you need a religion to justify or give credence to your relationship with God? God exists whether or not we simple humans acknowledge him/her with a religion. If you happen to fully agree with a particular religion's views of God, then subscribe to that religion. I am just saying that I believe that God is far too great to be encapsulated by any mere mortal's religion. I don't think that we can fully express the enormity of God with a religion, no matter how inspired that religion may be. I don't look down upon those that do, I only implore them to examine God and their personal relationship with God for themselves. I think that God is the most important thing in any humans life, so to leave your relationship with God up to someone else is sinful. Take full responsibility for your relationship to God. It's when we get caught up in someone else's dogma that we trivialize God. That is unforgivable in my book. Not to say that MY book is gospel, just that I take my relationship with God with the utmost sincerity. If we all did so, maybe we wouldn't be in this mess. Who knows? Certainly not I. Much respect to you, Russell. I wish more of us had such passion for God, regardless of our religious affilliations. Peace to you. Let's get together with Russell D. for a beer. Or maybe some wine.

Fine, we can call it a crutch. That works for me. A retarded mystical crutch that turns wine into blood and hates gay people. Fine crutch indeed.

Crazy Cal Thomas uses Leviticus to make his point. Of course passages therein would sanction making slaves of any illegal immigrants, or Buddhists living in the US, and keeping them forever! I'd say it's a pretty good deal for Cal.

Leviticus 25:44-46
Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever.

Oops, I did it again. The last reply to Brambleton about animal sex and Genesis is mine.

Brambleton may be right about sex with animals. After all, there is this in Genesis:

2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
2:20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; BUT FOR ADAM THERE WAS NOT FOUND AN HELP MEET FOR HIM [emphasis added].

So, let's review: Apparently after deciding that none of the animals were a proper help meet for lonely Adam -- maybe this is because they tried things we don't want to talk about -- God made Adam fall asleep, took one of his ribs, made Eve, and hilarious and wacky adventures ensued. Recall that the next chapter in the book has a talking snake, so it seems that Adam could have had a conversation with the animals if the LORD had willed it -- apparently they were found to be lacking in some other way. As I said, Brambleton knows his scriptures!

Russell,

Please post the Biblical scripture that condones incest and sex with animals. I'll look forward to your response.

Byrone,

Apparently, I have no idea what you're talking about. Please explain to me how I can have a relationship with God but be without religion.

Hey Joe Campbell,

Lighten up dude. I don't believe in God either, but I do have respect for people that do believe in Him. The only time it pisses me off is when they try to make me believe in what they do, and don't listen to what I say. Belief in God is not a weakness.........its just what that person needs to get through the day. think of it more as a crutch.

Jt, Pascals Gambit is a retarded logical fallacy. go read some more. You might as well believe in my invisible pink dragon.

Anyone who believes in God is weak and corrupt.

D.Cox,

Ok, I can see that you are a good guy, and you agree with Byrone, and that I'd like to buy you a drink too. But I do have to add one comment about that personal relationship part. God doesn't initiate it, Man does. Did God come to you? No.
Did you go to Him? Yes. But don't get me wrong, I still like you. And I still wanna buy both you and Byron a beer.

Sex is one of the most powerful human drives and emotions. It is no surprise religion has targeted this in its never ending quest to control and dominate people. Sexual response is an easy target to generate guilt. Guilt is the motivator of religions. Man will never be free of sexual desire. It's in our wiring. Maybe oneday, man will be free of religion trying to make us feel guilty about it for the purpose of total domination and manipulation.

BYRONE,

RE. The Way

Not a chance. It's all about a personal relationship that God initiated.

DC

BYRONE,

You are correct. It is more than sex outside of marriage that is ailing humanity. Mr. Thomas' comments simply stated that the misuse of what is good can be very detrimental.

Never said anything about sex being dirty or unholy...I have 5 children with the same wife and don't feel one bit guilty about the joy of the conception experience.:)

I don't base my life on statistics, but I don't dismiss or rationlaize them either. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it seems that it is a pretty good chance that it is a... It's not a deep question to meditate on. I agree with your statement, "Think for yourself."

The reason STDs are on the increase is not because the population continues to grow. It seems that folks want to dismiss any evidence that would infringe on their freedom. Honor what is right and you won't borrow any additional trouble. What's right is healthy.

The point that there is a Way to live transcends human sexuality. The guys I visited in the local jail yesterday were not there because of sex crimes. They violated a written code of law and conduct and now they are dealing with the consequences. Simple, follow God's Way.

Cal Thomas quotes from Leviticus while warning us of the sad consequences of mocking God's laws.

Only someone who is really looking to be mocked quotes from Leviticus. Here is part of it that says that God finds childbirth sinful.

12:2 If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean.
12:3 And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.
12:4 And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying three and thirty days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled.
12:5 But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her separation: and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying threescore and six days.
12:6 And when the days of her purifying are fulfilled, for a son, or for a daughter, she shall bring a lamb of the first year for a burnt offering, and a young pigeon, or dove,
for a sin offering, unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, unto the priest.
12:7 Who shall offer it before the LORD, and make an atonement for her; and she shall be cleansed from the issue of her blood. This is the law for her that hath born a male or a female.

Brambleton,

When you say you'd rather have your children learn about the passion of sex from the Bible, does that also include the incest and sex with animals? Just wondering, cause it seems to me that the Bible has a really aweful way of looking at sex.

Brambleton,

That post about the 6th graders was ridiculous even for you. You referenced absolutly nothing that had been discussed. A child could pick apart your "argument".

Brambleton,

You personify my objection to the Bible and organized religion. You took what I said and twisted it to fit your argument. I never once mentioned giving condoms to 6th graders. I never even inferred that in my message. You simply want to paint me as a pervert that wants to encourage moral decay. Please don't put words in my mouth. What is it about most christians that I come in contact with that makes them want to tell me how to think and feel. I encourage you to think for yourself. I don't tell you how to think.

"We all, humans, bees and birds do it" when it comes to sex. One thing is sure, god has given SELF CONTROL only to humans. I wont even say the wisdom to know the right from wrong. He has given that power to animals too. Dog is an example. He is loyal to his master and if an intruder gets in he will attack.
I very much agree with Mr thomas. God still is the # 1, most creative intellegent,utmost archetecht/engineer in the whole wide universe. He designed and engineered each and every part of human body and its use and function. May be that is the reason certain bacteria is found only in certain parts of the body and some fluids are generated only when it is needed and some are already inside of the humans and god did not want humans to mix them. Now that they do, all these diseases also started (HIV, AIDS etc.) Sex is both beautiful, ugly and mean. Beautiful, when it is between two people who love each other and are husband and wife. Any other form of sex is ugly and mean. Examples are incest, infidelity and rape. God meant sex to be between a man and a woman only. In todays world, even among husbands and wives, they use outside objects to satisfy themselves. If love is only based on sex, there is no love in it. If humans start to behave like a dog in heat, where is his morality? One comment says god created Jesus, but no sex is mentioned. That is why it is said "he was born without sin" (God did not create Jesus, he himself came down as a child to show the mankind about being humble and be an example. If he wasn't god, he would not be able to do all the things that he did). One thing we need to remember is 'Humans are not created for religion, but religion is created for humans'. If the religion or society do not enforce any laws regarding marriage, sex or divorce we all can imagine the chaose it is going to create. Men like to have three women, one to be in bed, one of pamper them and one to be a maid. Humans do like change. So after sometime in a relationship, there is nothing new about it and can get bored. Just like we like to get dressed in new colthes. God intention on sex was for the world to go on.

Seeing as the two major religions in the world (Islam and Catholicism) are RIDDLED with gross perversion I think religions should shut up about sex.

Buggering Bishops, Pedo Priests, Child raping Clerics and Holy men etc etc....

I won't be lectured on sex by perverted dogs.

And your God gave us a sex drive not relotely based on procreation.
He created the clit which serves no purpse other then pleasure.

Seems God wanted us to have sex whenver we wanted to and to judge that by our OWN morality and risk assessment.

I THINK YOU CALL IT FREE WILL!!

"God also instituted boundaries for sexual expression to protect man from its misuse."

Biologically & scientifically, it is proven that homosexuality is part of nature, and a natural (in this context, God-created) function. So, would this fall under your "protected from misuse" definition? Just curious.

"Whether you believe in God or not has nothing to do with your ability to think for yourself." That's right. And what secular society has come up with, after decades of thinking for itself, is that 6th graders are better off with condoms. That's right. We're weak, selfish, and hard wired to have sex. No thanks. I'd rather my children experience the intimacy and passion of sex as described in the Bible as opposed to carrying around all the baggage associated with "casual" sex.

d.coxq

P.S.

Your "Way that leads to results". Is that the same way that has led to a Vatican that hordes inordinate amounts of great art and wealth while their fellow humans are starving to death? A Vatican that protects child molestors? Is that the same way? Interesting......

d.coxq,

Interesting that you make these monumental assumptions. Interesting that as the population increases, so do the instances of STD's. Interesting how you fail to explore the possibility that maybe it's mother nature introducing these STD's as a way of telling us stupid humans to stop procreating because she can't sustain that many lives. Interesting that you don't further expore the possibility that cancer and all other non-sexual diseases also fall into this category. Interesting that you insist that it's dirty, unholy sex that is ailing humanity, not our self-righteousness. I have a suggestion. Do some meditation on some deeper questions. If you have the courage.

jesus spoke the truth too... but the people rejected him as well too bad

Religion and it's moral spew has done more to harm people than anything else in history.
I grew up in an ultra-conservative christian faith. Sex was not only condemned, but not spoken about period. This "mystery of sex" did nothing to stop the in-breed natural human urge to mate. The silence (mystery) did make a whole generation of uneducated kids. It made people ashamed of their natural feeling, and in some cases induced an environment where suicide and mental illness resulted from the inferred guilt of violationg "God's will".
I have seen lives and families destroyed by the moral judgement of religious leaders; made worse when church laypersons or the pastor's wife leak confessional confidences. Where was God's law at that moment?
The uneducated young people in my town that ended up pregnant out of wedlock, or ripped out of the closet by a church leak to the congregation had nothing to do with a failure to follow God's law. It had more to do with the repressive atitude that prevails to prevent basic education from enlightening minds, and providing basic tools of sexual survival. Worse is that same church instantly shunned these people when it was discovered that they had "voilated God's laws".
Religion is a created POLITICAL organization created by man. It has rules and definitions designed to support and protect their own interests. All the world's religions when examined together set forth a wonderful guide for good living, and living well with each other.
Sex is wonderful and beautiful when borne from love and mutual respect. Keep religion out of the bedroom, out of my pants, and leave it in the church, synagog, mosque, or temple where it belongs.

Interesting comments from those who hold to the opinion that sex is free for the taking and that there are no consequences for "free-love."

Interesting that the evening news reported just yesterday, 2/14, that an estimated 19 million new cases of STDs are reported each year. Almost half of this number represents thosed who are ages 15-24...hmmm

Interesting that the CDC research backs up these numbers.

Interesting that in the early 1960's there were only 2 STDs and now there are 25...hmmm?

Interesting that the CDC also reports that the cost of treating STDs is $13 billion annually.

Interesting. It looks like reality is confirming to us that writing our own rules may not be the best choice in the long run nor is it free. It would seem that we are trying the experiment of how not to live, and in the process we are discovering that there really is a Reality. As E. Stanley Jones used to say, "There is a way that is not the Way. There is a way that is the Way. The way that is not the way always leads to consequences. The way that is the Way always leads to results."

Interesting...I think I will continue to choose the Way that leads to results.

Thanks, Russell. I'd like to buy you a beer too. Maybe if we have enough of them, we can figure out how to get it through people's heads that they don't need religion to love life and love God. Either way, we'll have a good time! Peace, brother.

Byrone,

Hey man, let me buy you a beer dude. That was excellent, I couldn't put it better myself

Whether you believe in God or not has nothing to do with your ability to think for yourself. If you believe in God, establish your own relationship with God. Don't let smug, self-righteous blow hards like Cal tell you want God wants. Don't let some 2000 yr old book written by sexist old men tell you what God wants. Is it blasphemous to say that you can communicate with God just as clearly as any member of human society? No. But it certainly undermines the power that the church holds over your life. That's why they don't preach it. Cal would never recommend it, because you never have to listen to his half-witted regurgitations of tired platitudes. I have news for you, Cal and everyone of your poor apostles. Old-fashioned is just a nice way of saying that you are too mentally lazy to try to figure out life for yourself and too scared to question authority. Religions have been invented, re-thought, redefined and dismissed over the course of humanity's evolution. Why stop with the religions we have now? Why not make a better religion? Or, better still, come to the realization that faith in God does not require adherence to a religion. God exists with or without religion. Let's just try to be good to each other. How's that for a belief? Oh. By the way. To say that Cal doesn't stoop to attacking or insulting anyone is to admit to turning a blind eye. To cast stones at those who have "broken lives" as a result of living outside of God's rules is most certainly an attack and an insult. Every bit as much as I have insulted and attacked Cal. At least I don't deny it. I'm not afraid to admit my humanity.

To JH:

You say today's society is immoral as opposed to 15-20 years ago? Maybe, but we like it that way. What about how it was 30 or so years ago with public lynchings. Parents brought their children to watch innocent black men be hung and tortured. You telling me that it was alright? Because if you were to really follow the word of God according to the Bible, we'd still have slavery. Read your Bible again and hopefully, you'll understand that it is not something to by exactly, it is something to look at and use as a guideline. Ever heard of the saying, don't believe everything you read? It's true

Thank you for a straight-forward, scriptually-based column.

Cal;

I'm a fan of your writting but please stop lumping us Jews with you Christians. Speak for your own folks and we will do the same.

Second; we have no "Father, Son and Holy Ghost"; just G-d. That difference alone should make the term Judeo/ Christian seem as innacuate as it is.

My hat's off to you! Society today is so immoral! I am truly scared for these people without God in their life! I pray that the Holy Spirit moves in the lives of the non-believers! The Bible is the "Word" and we all should be living by it! Look at society today verses 15-20 years ago! I don't even want my children to watch t.v. these days! WAKE UP AMERICA!

Cal:

For the sake of argument assume a God. Your comments then raise two questions.

First, how would you know what God wants in regards to sex? You make all sorts of assumptions about absolute rules that apply regardless of the evil consequences of such rules. For example, you declare all divorse is bad. Experience suggests otherwise. So may be you are talking to you, not God. How do you know?

Second, different religions reach different conclusions about sex, and even members of your own religion do not agree with your entire sexual agenda. So, who is to tell which one of religous views is right? They can't all be right, because they contradict each other. Are you arrogant enough to believe that you have the One True Path to God?

If you cannot answer these questions, then you have no basis for your claim, "because God said so." You don't know that.

Mr. Thomas uses the word "Sex" several times in his article but does not once use the word "love". Is he implying that sex is a matter of of simply following rules and love is not a factor?

What a glaring error.

God played two cruel jokes on humanity. One is that any two idiots can get together to produce a child that is completely dependent upon those two idiots for survival. The other one is that He placed the world’s most valuable substance beneath the feet of half a billion maniacs.

Joe Campbell,

I think it's better to believe and follow God, only to die and find He doesn't exist, than to openly deny His existence with such hatred, only to die and find out He Is.

Vincent,

It seems to me that you are a very religous man, and a God fearing person. It also seems that you have read the Bible. But if you knew anything about the Bible, you'd know that the story of Noah and the flood was a borrowed story. Most of the Bible is either borrowed stories, or the same story told in a different way. You really need to come out of your bubble and live life man.

I will say that I don't believe in God, but I will say this, I'd rather belive in a loving one than an angry one that is gonna smite me if I mess up.

If God created sex, he didn't create enough of it.

If one thinks the Bible doesn't mention sex it's because one isn't reading it. Read the Song of Solomon and you'll know what I'm talking about. We are free moral agents and thankfully many of us are fortunate to live in a place where we can choose to worship God or not. Whether or not our forefathers had too much to drink I'm glad that they had the courage to fight for the freedoms we enjoy. For those that don't believe in God, well that's your choice and that's my point. We all have choices to make and we all have freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Whether you believe in the inspired word of God is your choice but I challenge you to read it anyway. I also would like to encourage respectfulness of people's choices. Whether Christian, Jew, Muslim or atheist, be respectful of people and their right to free speech and freedom of religion.

You people need to wake up. Remember 9-11. Oh, this could never happen. It did!! Why?

Cal's comments ring true for many reasons. The replys reflect this also. That mankind is so far removed from truth is self-evident. We don't even know who we are or why we are. Quit thinking the devil lives in a subterranean cavern waiting for the dead. He corrupts the minds of unbelievers.

If you think the universe was created by some force unknown and unacknowledged. Go ahead. If you think mankind is not accountable to God? Think again. Ask the people of Noah's era, Sodom and Gomorrah, and other destructions in the bible what they think now.

Jesus was a perfect man and he was murdered. Fable?? The truth of the bible is clearly reflected in so many lives today. You don't care and you don't believe!! Live your life, but know this God waits in silence for a reason: to judge the living and the DEAD!!

To Sikander,

Want to know the ultimate truth..............here it is

A person is intelligent, whereas people are idiots

WHAT IS ULTIMATE TRUTH???
we all are running according to our desire and wish but reality is behind it . that is a mystry . now question arises what is ULTIMATE TRUTH????????????????

sounds like something only the true God would say to the many pathetic humans that follow their own counsel & wisdom to what is right & wrong

To paraphrase Mr. Campbell:

"One can ... without consequences."

Taking the charged portion of the sentence out makes it clearly obvious that the statement as a whole is patently untrue. Anyone that thinks they can do anything without consequences, whether it is throwing a ball or having sex, is an idiot. It doesn't matter if you prefer the laws of physics or the laws of God, both teach that every action will have consequences. Ignore that fact at your own risk, but don't spew your own lies, "you nutjob."

Funny how the article, whatever Cal had to say appeared thoughtful and reverent. Something to chew on even if you may disagree. None of the comments from the crowd offered anything thoughtful or even useful. Just the same tired drivel and insults about how there's no mystery except in our own imagninations...something that probably led Cal to feel a "need" or desire to write such an article in the first place. If you think Cal and his faith is full of crap, why did you read his article in the first place? I don't know about you, but the way I linked to the article blatently stated that it was from a religious perspective. What kinds of things did you expect him to write about. Duh!

I feel sorry for you, Joe Campbell. You are obviously a very lost and unhappy person. I'm sure you live your life in just the way you described, but it doesn't seem to have given you any contentment or peace. You seem like an angry person. You can continue to "do what you want", but you will never know the riches of a true relationship with God. For that reason, I am truly concerned for you.

When you are taking your last breath, you can reflect on all the great sex you have had in your lifetime. I hope that brings you some peace in those last moments.

Mr. Thomas, I must admit, I am not perfect, however, I couldn't agree with you more on this article.

Responding in a fashion that god does exist, I would say that there is quite some variety in sexual expression. Where as some monothiests would claim that sex exists for the sole purpose of procreation and a very minute percentage if any have sex just for that purpose, so therefore pepole are having sex without reason for procreation.
Maybe it is just an excercise that when they need to procrate they are able to do so, after all they practiced so much.
I think all this church talk about sex is a manipulative tool by the churches, since they really have no proof of what they say is true, since Abraham came around only about 1800 BC, enough to prove he is a definite spoof.
Most of this sexual paranoia that goes aroud now a days, we have to thank this "Liviticus" for.
I have a question? was Liviticu around before or after the 10 commandments, because if he was around before, it seems he cannot comprehend the commanment of do not kill, and therfore he goes against the will of god, since he is such a vengeful and murdurous person, so much for the love and forgiveness of christ.
Smart people are smart people and whomsoever wants to beleve in BS is more than wellcome in our society to do so, stupid people are easy to scare and control, I instead will hold it to your face and mostlikely god would too.

To all,

God created sex? I find that hard to believe. Man created sex? I belive that. See where I am going with this? Man created God, not the other way around. Man created God in many forms and many ways, long before Christianity was ever born. Man also created religion, which uses sex as it's template for evil and wrong-doing. When are people gonna learn that they are individuals and answer to nobody but themselves?

Don't get me wrong, I think religion is good. Over all, it teaches good things, like kindness and generousity. Yet somehow it also teaches regression and hate. Yes, I said hate. I also said regression. When a person lives with repressed feelings and needs for so long, it can have bad consequences, even more so than if one was to have sex before marriage.

People say that the Bible needs to be followed because it is the word of God.It is not the word of God, it is the word of men, who think they know what is best for us. Are you gonna let someone tell you how to live your life? I'm not. I am gonna live my life to the fullest. If that includes sex before marriage, then so be it. I'll bet that I will die a happier man than the one who spent his life in service and repression. And guess what, I'll bet I even go to the same place you do.

I was struck by your comment, "In our sexually-obsessed culture in which body parts and bodily fluids are openly displayed and discussed on TV and the Internet, there is little “mystery” left about sex." As a child and later as a parent and now retired I have lived on farms and I can tell you sir, that their is little "mystery" about sex in nature, especially after you've had to assist in both conception and birth. The only "mystery" about sex is that put upon it by man. My children and I received an education in "sex ed" far superior to anything learned in school, weekday or Sunday! Not to mention lessons in responsibilty, compassion, initiative, forthrightness taught up front and personal that no sterile reading of the bible or pontificating from the pulpit can convey. Between living on farms I spent time traveling overseas, as an army brat, a grunt and a civilian, or going to school learning history, principally Colonial American and I can also tell you that we do not live in either a particulary blessed or cursed country, nor are we living in either a particulary dissolute or virtuous time in our history. According to the records kept by the Puritans, more than half of all initial births occurred less than nine months after the nuptials. You only have to look at the bar bill for the Continental Congress and calculate the quantity of alcohol consumed per member to understand why otherwise sober and thoughful men would so blithley take on the most formidable military power of the age--the answer is simple! They were sh*t-faced, and pretty much stayed that way for the duration. (Do I hear, "Bring 'em on?" or how about, "The Red Coats are coming, hee haw!") History rarely lives up to one's high ideals, but it sure is a lot more interesting than some mythologized sacred cows. Oh yes and do indulge me one more comment on your comment that, "The landscape is littered with the broken lives of people who have gone outside those [sexual] boundaries." Buddy, the landscape is littered with a lot more lives broken from causes other than crossing sexual boundaries. The professed horror of "Crossing sexual boundaries" is just a distraction from the real war on freedom and liberty waged by the minions of the persecutors of the human spirit, of which you Cal Thomas are one. Since when did you start offering advice on sex? Your opinions about the necessity for war and the need to support your president regardless of national interest don't seem particularly enlightining--anymore. So now you've moved on to pontificating about sex, another subject for which you are as unqualified to speak as anyone. God bless America, where anyone with a big enough megaphone can drown out debate and claim the ensuing deafness proves he's right . . . well as my ma used to say, "Those who can--do, and those that can't talk about it." Of course I really liked what my first Platoon Sergeant said upon overhearing a conversation among some very green lieutenants concerning the virtues and vices of sex, and remarked, literally in passing, "Gentlemen, if you don't think sex is dirty--you ain't doin' it right!" Now that is real, "Wisdom from the East and from the West, that is subject to no academic rule," and truer words were ne'er spoken. Semper Fi, Mac!

Right On, Anonymous

Bravo, Mr. Thomas!

You put forth your point of view with clarity and brevity. You didn't go out of your way to offend or attack anybody; you merely stated your own opinion.

A well written article for us all to ponder and slowly chew over, instead of hastily jumping to conclusions and resorting to insults.

Actually, this is disappointing ... usually, this nitwit Cal comes up with something more amusing that this. All drivel, but this time, it's almost morbid.

What happened to your strict constructionist views Cal?

I thought you'd proclaim something like

God created MAN out of thin air with no SEX mentioned in Da Bible.

God created WOMAN out of rib - no SEX mentioned in Da Bible.

God created Jesus -- well God only knows how -- but no SEX is mentioned anywhere.

Ergo, it follows that Christians have a special relationship with the Earth and should not screw the environment.

That's how your "logic" travels usually go.

Maybe its the toxic shock of Valentine's Day that got Cal.

While it might be beneficial to have limits for sexual expression, the problem is that religions claim that God has determined those boundaries. Why should we accept any claim like that? For all we know, some earthly authority might have invented sexual rules for its own benefit, and simply used God's name as a propaganda tool.

Surely a married couple would remain monogamous because they love each other enough to uphold their promises, not because someone claims that God has ordered couples to be monogamous. Surely adultery should be wrong because of the betrayal and deception involved, not because someone claims that God wrote a commandment against adultery.

I agree with Mr. Thomas. Well said, sir!

I will do what I want.

You are old-fashioned.

One can have non-marital sex without consequences.

People such as yourself who insist on knowing a universal and all-encompassing truth, and then holding others to the standards you believe in, are the root of problems. Problems don't come from people going against the laws in your bible, problems come from your insistence that your bible is the only truth there is.

You will die and the world will go on without you, and all the people who do not follow the same rules you do will also all eventually die. When we die, nothing will happen. And you will have spent your life judging others and being smug and correct all the time. Those of us that break the laws of your Bible will have spent our lives doing what we wanted, and having great sex.

Happy Valentine's Day, you nutjob.