Should the Holy Bible be re-written or a new bible made to suit the wants of per

1. 69

   FeniqueSposted 8 years ago

   Should the Holy Bible be re-written or a new bible made to suit the wants of person/s?
   
   This is a very delegate subject, so I'll tread lightly.  A Major blow to the covenant of Marriage, Holy Scripture/s, Creators commands/law/s, because of the US high courts ruling.   In essences slapped the Creator in the face, stated He is a Lie and laws are wrong.   Since, the court doesn't recognize the covenant of marriage as God's Law.  Should the Bible be re-written and the areas that state marriage shall be between 1 Man/Woman omitted?  A new bible made up just for those in support  and also take out other laws: adultery, Truth, and Murder? So that both side will be equal.

   report
2. 70

   Old-Empresarioposted 8 years ago

   Religion does not necessarily reflect political realities. Anyone can choose to write their own version of the Bible if they wish.

   report
   1. 69

      FeniqueSposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Thank you and I agree.  What I'd love to read is the original holy scroll things loose a lot of context in translation and different writers. There is not telling how much is misquoted, missing or sealed from the Bible.

      report
3. 38

   ChristinSposted 8 years ago

   
   
   First of all, the United States is not a theocracy.  I'm sorry, I am not one to tread lightly so I'll just say it like it is...
   
   You can take passages out of the bible out of context and make it say anything you want it to say.  People have done this for centuries.  Let's take Leviticus for example - that's the one most often quoted against gay people.  I am going to attach a quick graphic that highlights all the other "abominations" in the same book - yet we've done away with almost all of them (thankfully!)
   
   The bible also condones slavery in several locations - we abolished that.  In the Bible, women are property - did away with that too, no text changes necessary.  Then there's the whole rule where daughters had to marry their rapists and the rapist had to pay the father 50 sheckles for the inconvenience of the "property damage" - AH the good old days. We don't do that anymore either.  Also men could have multiple wives, concubines, etc. - again modern society frowns on these things, but the text was not altered.
   
   You have the right to believe whatever you want. Shout it from the rooftops if you want, no one is stopping you. What you do not have the right to do is impose your beliefs on secular law.  The beauty of the separation of church & state is it protects all of us.  Govt. can't force your church to marry same sex couples and you no longer get to impose your religious ideas onto secular law.  Yay constitution!
   
   This is an issue of equal rights and the 14th amendment protects our citizens from unfair treatment under the law.  Who other people marry in no way effects your ability to go on about your daily life.  Your rights to religious beliefs end where anothers rights to equality and fair treatment begin. 
   
   That is the beauty of the US and one of the true freedoms we have left. The constitution protects those who would otherwise be openly mistreated.

   report
   1. 69

      FeniqueSposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Thank you for telling like it is for you. Pastor have been sue for not marring couples as well as businesses forced to make cakes. 14th Amend, protect them from unfair treatment, or is it one-sided as most laws seem to be today and in biblical times.

      report
   2. 38

      ChristinSposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Show me where a pastor has been sued successfully - I want to see evidence.   a pastor cannot be forced to marry same sex couples. We don't live in a theocracy so "Gods" law doesn't matter outside church.

      report
   3. 69

      FeniqueSposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Laws of this nation were formed from the bible.  So God's law do matter outside the church.
      One I found was listed they won.  but stress they were put through because of it and I have no doubt other were too.
      http://www.charismanews.com/us/45905-pen

      report
   4. 38

      ChristinSposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      You clearly don't understand how the constitution works then, and also this chapel is for profit and doesn't provide only religious services, that's the difference.  No, we have separation of church and state, this is not that difficult of a concept.

      report
   5. 90

      Kylyssaposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      My answer included a little of the same information but it got deleted so I'm writing a hub so my additional commentary about love, not sex being the foundation of a healthy marriage won't be lost.

      report
   6. 69

      FeniqueSposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      If the nations laws were taking from bible, then how can God not matter outside of church.  Then does it mean that laws don't matter in either place church or state.  I want to thank you for your answers/comments.  Makes me think hard and I LOVE IT!

      report
   7. 38

      ChristinSposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      The idea that laws and morality is Biblical is frankly, silly. There are plenty of people in other religions and without religion, who are law abiding good people. Ancient book not required. Discrimination is against the law, thankfully so!

      report
   8. 69

      FeniqueSposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      @Kylyssa Thank you so much.

      report
4. 81

   peachpurpleposted 8 years ago

   no, bible should not be rewritten by humans, let it be as it is, if rewritten, new words and law to be enforce not by GOD

   report
   1. 69

      FeniqueSposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Thank you for your answer. as I've answered Old-Empresario and Paula.  The Bible has lost a whole lot in translation, misquoted and books sealed. If God didn't think we could hand that could we if it were re-written?

      report
5. 60

   fpherj48posted 8 years ago

   Christin so often makes my comment easy.  I could not agree MORE with her eloquent and realistic response. 
   Whatever went on over 2000 years ago when the allegedly "Inspired" biblical text was written, has very little if any affect upon the world and it's inhabitants here and now. 
   
   IMHO, there really isn't even any room whatsoever for debate on this.  To understand this requires a bit of intelligence and common sense with a handle on reality.....
   
   Many History books, the Bible included, could probably qualify as needing changes or updates & explanations, but it's not necessary to rewrite them.  They may stand as they are as time and human beings progress, discover and learn truth and facts.

   report
   1. 69

      FeniqueSposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Thank you for your answer, I think the bible has lost a whole lot in being translated; misquoted, books lost or not recorded, and books sealed leaving them unfinished.  We don't know what this miss/lost information has.  Our minds couldn't take it.

      report
   2. 38

      ChristinSposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Thank you Paula, while it's great for it's historical context, that ancient book should by no means dictate current social standards.  People evolve. I wouldn't consult a 2,000 year old medical journal for example.

      report
6. 90

   Kylyssaposted 8 years ago

   My apologies for commenting about my deleted answer. I didn't find your email until after I checked HubPages so I didn't know the deletion was an accident. I spent so long typing my answer (I type slowly) that it was very upsetting to see it gone. I don't recall my wording.
   
   Objecting to same sex marriage is, in my opinion, the same as thinking marriage is about sex rather than about love, commitment and devotion. The only difference between a same sex couple and an opposite sex couple is their reproductive organs so that must be the reason people object. The only difference is something we, as decent human beings, should not even be thinking about other people we aren't lovers with. I don't see an elderly couple holding hands and consider whether or not the kind of sex they have or don't have is a sin or gross or anything at all. I think, how sweet, it's nice to see people loving one another.
   
   There's no reason to deny a couple the ability to comfort one another as they sicken and die, even if they aren't the sort of couple you approve of. That's what banning same sex marriage does. I'm not a Christian, but I think compassion is something most Christians value. What is compassionate about keeping people who love one another apart?
   
   http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/19/healt … .html?_r=0
   http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/1 … 60488.html
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2CdX_y9L9w
   http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=7633058
   
   You can find dozens and dozens of stories like these if you but Google gay not allowed with dying partner or lesbian not allowed with dying partner. I challenge you to read or watch a dozen or so of those stories and to still think of equality as something sinful.
   
   I know the Bible says nothing about keeping people who love each other apart in their times of need, but the reality is that not allowing people to legally marry the ones they love causes this to happen. I think it's a horrible tragedy. I'm glad we've made legal advances in human rights now so that such tragedies need never happen again. If only we can get police to stop murdering black men, I'll start to feel like I'm living in a compassionate, civilized country.
   
   My beloved is a man and I'm a woman, but I see no difference between our love and the love of our friends Jeff and Chris. It would break my heart if either of them were in need and cruelly separated from the other. Love is love. Body parts mean nothing compared to love.

   report
   1. 69

      FeniqueSposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Apology accepted, when I read your comment I thought you had gotten the email.  I didn't see this until after I closed the question.  System is slow.  I wish we could choose two best answers.  Yours would be tied and on top.  Thank you again.

      report