POO,

gay marriage for the most part was already illegal, Christers wanted to keep it that way

So tell me, why are you a Christian if you don't follow the entire bible? You can't just not consider the bad part and follow the good part only. Don't come with the argument that 'The OT is not that important' because the NT is useless and meaningless without the OT. I've always wondered, how do theists who follow a holy book know what parts are up to interpretation and what parts are supposed to be interpreted literally? Why do some theists only follow some holy rules but dismiss other rules that are also in the same book and possess as much value? And why do some theists try to interpret phrases or verses that simply cannot be interpreted differently than the literal meaning? Putting it simply, if verse X says 'You shall kill all people of this category', how can we say that 'kill' doesn't actually mean 'kill' but other thing?

I'm interesting in knowing, Roman Catholic member

If the Bible was a book to be "followed", in the way you're using the word, it would be a book of rules.
I believe the Bible. As in, I believe that the people who wrote it were legitimately proposing ways to lead a moral life.
But the Bible isn't a unified text. It's a series of different works from different people and a progression of philosophical thought over a period of time. I'm a Christian because I believe that that thought comes to an end in Jesus, who nails what the Old Testament writers were getting at.

(July 27, 2014 at 3:39 pm)Purplundy Wrote: If the Bible was a book to be "followed", in the way you're using the word, it would be a book of rules.
I believe the Bible. As in, I believe that the people who wrote it were legitimately proposing ways to lead a moral life.
But the Bible isn't a unified text. It's a series of different works from different people and a progression of philosophical thought over a period of time. I'm a Christian because I believe that that thought comes to an end in Jesus, who nails what the Old Testament writers were getting at.

You still haven't answered my previous 3 questions. I'd like a theist to enlighten me

I've been thrashing about for a theological justification for 'Cafeteriaism' too.

Failing something damn convincing to indemnify the practice, I'm considering it to be the Christers cooperating with atheists in falsifying the religion.

A club, for us to wield, in other words, to bat them up aside the head.

(July 27, 2014 at 3:33 pm)Blackout Wrote: So tell me, why are you a Christian if you don't follow the entire bible?

Because the Bible itself says that I shouldn't follow all of it.

Maybe they realized how futile it is to try to follow all of it, if they put in there that cherry picking is ok.

I look at the OT through the lens of the NT.
Jesus came to people who thought like the writers of the OT and made them look outside the box.
As for those who wrote the Old Testament, it can be said that "[their] image of who God is and what's on God's mind is more tiny than it is troubled. It trips more on our puny sense of God than over conflicting creedal statements or theological considerations."—Greg Boyle

(July 27, 2014 at 4:35 pm)alpha male Wrote:

(July 27, 2014 at 3:33 pm)Blackout Wrote: So tell me, why are you a Christian if you don't follow the entire bible?

Because the Bible itself says that I shouldn't follow all of it.

So how do you know that you're supposed to follow or not?

From the moment everyone follows different verses and have different interpretations, that's not a religion any more, it's several religions

(July 27, 2014 at 4:35 pm)alpha male Wrote: Because the Bible itself says that I shouldn't follow all of it.

You're running into a wall, there, my brother in Christ Jesus. Few of the Bible writers knew each other and what every other biblical author had written, and none of them expected that they would be published in the same book.