Would you buy a car, a house, a yacht on just the seller's

[Zzyzx]

.
Would you buy a car, a house, a yacht on just the seller's word (assuming you had access to necessary funds)?

Wouldn't you carefully check (or have checked) those items before paying substantial amounts of money? Of course you would, you're no fool – not gullible – not a rube who just fell off the pumpkin truck. Right?

Checking for truth and accuracy is wise before committing to a course of action or making significant decisions. Right?

If someone tells you he can walk on water you're not likely to believe that unless you can see it done without tricks. If someone tells you that he saw a person walking on water you are even less likely to believe (if you have a lick of sense). If an anonymous person claims that another anonymous person saw the trick "long ago and far away" it would seem as though that would be STRONGLY doubted – unless it was told in religion promotional literature and/or by prophets and priests.

Why set aside judgment and rational fact-checking in order to accept what is said by religion promoters or religious literature?

[1213]

Not only that, but it seems that if you are a man and have a sex change so that you are partially female (his words), then gay marriage is OK.

“Sex change� doesn’t really change sex. It just destroys ones sex and gives imitation of other sex. And actually I think that is forbidden in the Bible because it is said:

He who is wounded in the stones, or has his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the assembly of Yahweh.
Deut. 23:1

[1213]

Are you indicating here that if you are ignorant of a sin, then it's not a sin?

I think that is what the Bible claims:

But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead. For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
Romans 7:8-9

And actually there is not necessary any sin in that. At least if they don’t do against Leviticus 18:22.

[Zzyzx]

.

And actually I think that is forbidden in the Bible because it is said:

He who is wounded in the stones, or has his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the assembly of Yahweh. Deut. 23:1

Thus, an "all-wise, all-knowing, just, fair, benevolent God" would supposedly reject (not allow entry to the "assembly of Yehweh") soldiers, firefighters, hero volunteers, accident or disease damaged who have been genitally "wounded or cut off" even if they are fervent believers and worshipers who live exemplary lives.

Does that make sense?

Who made up such silly rules? Who believes them?

[OnceConvinced]

Are you indicating here that if you are ignorant of a sin, then it's not a sin?

I think that is what the Bible claims:

But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead. For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
Romans 7:8-9

And actually there is not necessary any sin in that. At least if they don’t do against Leviticus 18:22.

So then if I live in deepest darkest Africa and I go raping, pillaging and murdering, not realizing that it's a sin against God, then I am not guilty of sinning. I could torture someone and put them through a painful and slow death, but that's not sinning.

Heck, let's not even go that extreme. I can tell lies, I can lust, I can show pride, not being aware I'm sinning against God and still get into Heaven because I've never technically sinned.

So why would Christians ever evangelize? Wouldn't it be better to just forget about all these people and let them remain in their ignorance, free from the threat of Hell, rather than enlightening them on their sin?

Seems to me that Jesus's death on the cross would truly be redundant if you could be forgiven without having to repent.

Although having said all that it would be a horrible scenario if you were a Christian and you sinned not realizing you were sinning and ended up going to Judgment Day with unconfessed sin due to ignorance. If that were the case probably very few Christians would get the pass into Heaven.

Hey what about when Jesus on the cross said "Forgive them for they know not what they do". They were ignorant of their sin. No doubt they believed they were just doing their job as instructed by their leaders. Why would Jesus ask God to forgive them if ignorance was equal to not sinning?

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 33 by Zzyzx]

Clearly your missing the context.

"2 A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord"

Now the question is what do they mean by the congregation of the Lord? seems to me like they can't commune or participate in some religious assemblage and the qualifications for it are not based on whether or not you are skilled or moral but rather you have male genitalia and are born out of wedlock. Seems kinda silly and arbitrary to me.

[Clownboat]

Not only that, but it seems that if you are a man and have a sex change so that you are partially female (his words), then gay marriage is OK.

“Sex change� doesn’t really change sex.

Ohhhhh, you can bet that it does change sex.

It just destroys ones sex and gives imitation of other sex.

So now being partially female doesn't matter? Where is your consistancy? Does a vagina no longer make a man at least partially female (again, your words)?

And actually I think that is forbidden in the Bible because it is said:
He who is wounded in the stones, or has his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the assembly of Yahweh.
Deut. 23:1

We are not talking about weird Bible quotes currently, but I notice others have addressed this already, so I'll wait for your responses to them.

[Clownboat]

Are you indicating here that if you are ignorant of a sin, then it's not a sin?

I think that is what the Bible claims:

Strange claim IMO coming from a guy that claims to know how Jesus thinks, don't you agree?
Perhaps Jesus is also not sure about many claims in the Bible? Odd thought, but what's more likely, that Jesus wouldn't know the Bible or that you really know how he thinks?

Can you tell me why Jesus doesn't want to assemble with men that have had accidents and injured their man parts? What are his thoughts on that if you don't mind?

[1213]

So then if I live in deepest darkest Africa and I go raping, pillaging and murdering, not realizing that it's a sin against God, then I am not guilty of sinning. I could torture someone and put them through a painful and slow death, but that's not sinning.

I think this is answer for that:

For as many as have sinned without law will also perish without the law. As many as have sinned under the law will be judged by the law. For it isn't the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law will be justified (for when Gentiles who don't have the law do by nature the things of the law, these, not having the law, are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience testifying with them, and their thoughts among themselves accusing or else excusing them) in the day when God will judge the secrets of men, according to my gospel, by Jesus Christ.
Romans 2:12-16

If person is not able to gene test is he really man, and can’t in any way know that he is not really woman, I think he is not guilty. However I think everyone could understand that rape is wrong, or that murder is wrong.

Heck, let's not even go that extreme. I can tell lies, I can lust, I can show pride, not being aware I'm sinning against God and still get into Heaven because I've never technically sinned.

According to the Bible, eternal life is for righteous, which means like right understanding. If you show that you have not right understanding, but you want evil things, then I think you will not have eternal life.

These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.
Mat. 25:46

So why would Christians ever evangelize? Wouldn't it be better to just forget about all these people and let them remain in their ignorance, free from the threat of Hell, rather than enlightening them on their sin?

Ignorance is not helpful. And sometimes even knowledge is not helpful, if person don’t have right understanding. Even in this vagina case, the ignorance will not help, if person is not righteous.

[1213]

So now being partially female doesn't matter? Where is your consistancy? Does a vagina no longer make a man at least partially female (again, your words)?

Yes, real vagina can be accepted as reason to believe that person is woman. Doctors can’t make real vagina, only something that looks similar.

[OnceConvinced]

So why would Christians ever evangelize? Wouldn't it be better to just forget about all these people and let them remain in their ignorance, free from the threat of Hell, rather than enlightening them on their sin?

Ignorance is not helpful. And sometimes even knowledge is not helpful, if person don’t have right understanding. Even in this vagina case, the ignorance will not help, if person is not righteous.

But if you educate them, then they have no excuse. They might reject your education. They might reject your God and then where do they end up? In Hell. You are just making things way worse for them. I know I would rather be ignorant and never have to be concerned with burning in hell than to be enlightened and then have to face it.

In your scenario, I cannot see Evangelism as a positive thing. I see it as a horrible thing, something that should be avoided at all costs.