Merlin

Yes, I'm saying they did not follow God's law on homosexuality because they were 'homophobes'.
They followed the law on homosexuality because it was God's law.

Johnny Skeptic

But why do you believe that they did not mistakenly assume that God opposed homosexuality? Innocent but inaccurate revelations are common in religious books.

If a God exists, he is not obligated to provide Christians with copies of the originals that faithfully represent the originals. This is especially true since he obviously felt that he was not obligated to provide any texts at all to hundreds of millions of people who died without hearing the Gospel message. In the first century, God discriminated against people who lived far away from Palestine by refusing to tell them about the Gospel message. Since spreading the Gospel message is obviously not one of God's top priorities, why is it one of your top priorities?

Merlin

I see the Bible as not just a religious book.
Why do you care about God's viewpoint of this one out of 600+ laws?

If He wishes the laws followed, then He is obligated to communicat His wishes.

He went one better.
He put His law in people's hearts

He asked us to share the news.

Johnny Skeptic

That cannot possibly be true because God refused to tell hundreds of millions of people about the Gospel message who died without hearing it. When geography decides who gets to hear the supposedly most important message ever written, it is clear that there is a rat in the woodpile somewhere.

Sven

Why talk about a 5th and 6th day if they are not directly following each other? :huh:
Why even include "there was evening, there was morning", if the days were not directly following each other? :huh:
Why start every verse with "and", implying a direct chronological connection, if the days were not directly following each other? :huh:

Sorry, but using your methodology of "assuming inerrancy and looking for stretched explanations to explain contradictions away", one can prove each and every book to be inerrant.

Demonstrating that your methology only gives you a good feeling, but tells you nothing about reality.

Sven

Then why do when need missonaries? Why did Jesus tell his disciples to tell the news to everyone?

Merlin

No. My methodology shows tha how people thought and wrote thousands of years ago is different than how you think today.

Merlin

Are we discussing the law, or the 'news' of Jesus?

Sven

And why did you not address my three questions at all?
I give you another try. Your "methology" can handle this, no?

And you of course ignored that your methology proves each and every book to be inerrant.

Sven

I knew you would jump on this.

But it's irrelevant.

Because if he put the law in our hearts, why did he not also put the news there?

BTW, the fact that loads of different morals exist(ed) in different cultures (at different times) shows quite clearly that there's nothing like a universal law in our hearts.