http://worldnetdaily.com/news/articl...TICLE_ID=31080
Essentially, some of the more aggressively anti homosexual passages.
I don't know how to react to this one!!!:confused:
Printable View
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/articl...TICLE_ID=31080
Essentially, some of the more aggressively anti homosexual passages.
I don't know how to react to this one!!!:confused:
Well, 1984 has been rather slow arriving...
Going out with a girlie in a small town I grew up in I now get to see her daughters friends parents use the bible to justify all sorts of stupidity and hatred, taking every passage literally whenever it is something they agree with. Got 2 of them that are not alowed to see Harry Potter films/books because he's a wizard and he's the devil and another one who hates "teh gays" cuz is sez tu in da baaahbuil... It's so frightening that people could take a book written by a roman about a man he never met that has been translated several times so literally.
Conversely, this is just another instance of censorship. So glad I don't live anywhere that can censor a religious text or religion, no matter how different it is. Even if I don't like someones religion I defend their right to believe what they will. This is silly.
The whole Christian religion is under attack because it's centered around the relationship between a husband and wife. Marriages are modeled after the relationship between Christ (the husband) and the church (the bride). Today's society doesn't believe in families any more, common law relationships are becoming more and more common, and the Liberal government in this country has enacted policies that support single parent families and two income earners, instead of supporting married couples with children. It's almost as if married people are being punished!
The reason the bible speaks out against homosexuality is because its contrary to everything Christ was about. Read Genesis Chapter 19. God didn't obliterate the wicked cities of Sodom and Gamorah because he was bored. These same people criticizing the bible for saying that homosexuality is wrong, don't like this passage because it tells them they will be destroyed for their wicked ways, and that's something they CAN'T disagree with unlike the other passages they're speaking out against.
Whatever happened to freedom of the press? Next thing you know anti-drunk-driving campaigns will be outlawed because it makes drinkers and alcoholics feel bad? Get real. Send a letter to your MP and the PM. You don't even need a stamp.
Incidentally, the tendency to take the Bible literally (basically the base for the fundamentalist branches of Christianity) started in the Scientific Revolution.
As for the homo-bit...
I believe there are more passages than that specifically stating that homosexuality is a SIN.
So, if one professes to be a Christian & homosexual, he is living in sin. :flames:
Dante (I believe) stuck them in Circle II of Hell.
Sorry to have offended anyone, but sin is sin is sin - there isn't any way around it.
It's a brave new world.
The situation can be resumed in simple terms, IMHO:
Whichever group/philosophy/way of thinking is most popular has the most "rights" while personal and communal responsabilities are disregarded.
The illusionary right to free speech is being slowly quelled by laws protecting special groups. People should be protected along with their individual rights and freedoms - not their opinions.
Why should the government get involved in protecting one special group over another? Doesn't that strike you as being very similar to the interpretation (not the original intent, though) of "seperation of church and state"? Aren't both situations indicative of government approval of one way of thinking over another?
I'm a Bible believing Christian and would never consider bringing harm to a fellow man unless the well-being of my family or my personal liberty was at stake. My way of thinking and living has the same value as my neighbours.
To the liberal-minded in the government and elsewhere, I'm getting the feeling that my own beliefs are not only unpopular, they're being increasingly discriminated against.
I agree Adept....when was the last time you heard of someone getting sued because they "made fun of" a christian.
You frighten me, MacGyver.Quote:
Originally posted by MacGyver
The reason the bible speaks out against homosexuality is because its contrary to everything Christ was about.
And MacGyver's friends as well.
I do completely agree with you that it is not PC to make fun of gays, lesbians, blacks, women, disabled people, etc.
And it IS part of pop culture to make fun of Christians and the Bible.
This is a double standard that should not exist. Either allow satire of everybody (where I stand) or apply EQUAL censorship "limits" on what you write about everybody, regardless of who they are.
But the trouble is that the Bible isn't just anti-gay, it's aggressively so. It is not the golden rule, it is not tolerant, and It's not a live and let live scenario. It's a live my way or else my followers will persecute you in life and I will damn you to Hell in the afterlife scenario.
And God or no God, that's dirty pool.
So you should either allow the Bible's opponents the same freedom of speech... or censor those parts of the Bible. Nothing else is fair.
To continue on with that thought, everyone is living in sin (not just homosexuals). This is what I find so amusing about Christians that criticize homosexuals. Yes, the homosexuals are living in sin, but so is everyone else. "Let ye without sin cast the first stone" (not an exact quote, but close enough).Quote:
Originally posted by 10of40
. . . So, if one professes to be a Christian & homosexual, he is living in sin. . .
You are right, Jesus did say that. He said that about a woman that was about to be put to death by stoning for adultry.Quote:
Originally posted by Pinnacle
"Let ye without sin cast the first stone" (not an exact quote, but close enough).
Bon Jovi wrote a song awhile back (yeah I am old) called Living in Sin. It is a story about a young man around 21-25 or so who is intimatly involved with an underaged girl.
That is different than if the 2 met at a party and they hit it off. One thing lead to another, and the mistake was made. And it never happened again.
Now by Christain beliefs they sined in both cases. The diference is, in example 1, they knowingly continue to defy the Word, and do what they want, when they want, without regards for the Law of God, not to mention the Law of the local police. They are willfully choosing to Live in Sin.
Example 2 shows that they made a mistake and sinned. But they willingly chose not to continue that way of life together.
The woman that Jesus saved made a mistake, a mistake that equaled a sin. Jesus was referring to making mistakes and forgiveness, not an ongoing lifestyle of sleeping with married husbands
Now the overzealous people who say that gays/lesbians are bad people should just settle down and relax. They are individuals who have chosen what they do. There is a difference between not liking them and not liking what they do. You dont have to like what they do, but in the same process, you should not hate them.
Jesus expanded the commandment Thou Shall not Kill, to Thou shall not hate. If you don't hate, then you won't kill out of hate.
As for the zealots that believe that Harry Potter is evil, if you are to condem Mr. Potter for using magic and being a wizard, then you will have to condem Mr Walt Disiney and his evilness. Snow White, Cinderella, Bambi, Sword and the Stone, Lady & the Tramp, Sleeping Beauty etc. Also you can't forget The Wizard of Oz. To leave these out, you will be a hypocrite of the highest order, and your argument will go gown in flames.
For the record I am a Christain. :)
Interesting topic, hope it stays civil so we can continue the conversation.
I’m not going to debate over whether or not the commandment is from a deity to dislike/hate/subjugate another person or to shun them or what have you. I feel strongly somewhat like clam does and feel the argument can only lead to frayed tempers. No point in it as it’s doubtful anyone would convince the other party of anything.
I can agree that in the last few years Christians have become actively discriminated against in the press but as the majority or people in the US (and I suspect Canada though I don’t know) are Christian in one form or another I doubt any real consequences will come of all this. Though I myself do not believe in any religion I am troubled by others that feel that freedom of religion can be construed as freedom from religion. It is not. It is the freedom to practice religion free from government interference. It was designed to allow persons of one religion to live free of others of a different religion who might have control of government and seek to impose their will upon them.
I hear this spoken about in the media quite often but am shocked that the people who quite often purport that they are discriminated against often rail at any criticism at all. Just listening to callers on the radio defending Catholicism against anyone who wanted to have a full on investigation of the priests and the massive cover-up that lead to thousands being molested under the watchful eye of the church elders. Now of course the Catholics are not all Christians and vise versa, I’m just using that as an example of how even something as extreme as that is vehemently defended against the slightest criticism. I never understood the trepidation involved in questioning anything that another has faith in if they really feel it’s the true way. I’m off track and I’m going to end now.
Before I do end I will debate the statement that science was in any way shape or form responsible for twisting the words coming from the bible or causing people to take anything literally. I have yet to see a scientist who uses religion as a means to an empirical ending of an experiment but see quite a good deal of the religious who bastardize science to attempt to prove their faith. I should point out that science is in no way a belief but a system of gathering data and interpreting it and any theory welcomes open debate attempting to disprove it. Sorry, it just bugs me when the religious try to take a shot at a simple theorem that you need to give some shred of proof and to back up a hypothesis. Again, not trying to attack anyone, it just bugs the heck out of me.;)
Very well said. However the people who are like this I know of really don't care to hear argument against their belief. I’d make the statement that most folks believe in a way of life, in the way they want to believe it.Quote:
Originally posted by Jediab
As for the zealots that believe that Harry Potter is evil, if you are to condem Mr. Potter for using magic and being a wizard, then you will have to condem Mr Walt Disiney and his evilness. Snow White, Cinderella, Bambi, Sword and the Stone, Lady & the Tramp, Sleeping Beauty etc. Also you can't forget The Wizard of Oz. To leave these out, you will be a hypocrite of the highest order, and your argument will go gown in flames.
Why?Quote:
Originally posted by Wayward Clam
You frighten me, MacGyver.
Christianity is all about forgiveness. Yes homosexuality is wrong, but it's just as wrong as any other sin, whether it be murder or pirating software; it doesn't matter.Quote:
Originally posted by Wayward Clam
But the trouble is that the Bible isn't just anti-gay, it's aggressively so. It is not the golden rule, it is not tolerant, and It's not a live and let live scenario. It's a live my way or else my followers will persecute you in life and I will damn you to Hell in the afterlife scenario.
Christ's death on the cross means that any person can ask for unconditional forgiveness and receive it because he has already died for our sins. I am a sinner too, but I reach out to other unreached people in loving kindness. Sure they are sinning, but I want to see them reconciled to God through Christ the Son. I don't condemn them to a particular fate, but there are consequences to everything that we do and the bible clearly tells us what those are.
That is what Christ did time and time again, He hung out with the bad people who really needed Him and spoke out when it was warranted. As far as I'm concerned, we need to all be more like that and stand up for what we believe, instead of this political correctness walking on eggshells nonsense.
There is a difference between satire and sin (Rom. 1:27,28). The Bible does not call for Christians to ridicule homosexuals, even satirically (Titus 3:2). It does not call for Christians to persecute, harm or punish homosexuals (Rom. 12:14). It specifically states that judgement and punishment are the Lord's (Matt. 7:1-2,2 Tim. 4:1) and that Christians are to love all sinners no matter what their sin (Luke 6:35).Quote:
Originally posted by Wayward Clam
But the trouble is that the Bible isn't just anti-gay, it's aggressively so. It is not the golden rule, it is not tolerant, and It's not a live and let live scenario. It's a live my way or else my followers will persecute you in life and I will damn you to Hell in the afterlife scenario.
And God or no God, that's dirty pool.
So you should either allow the Bible's opponents the same freedom of speech... or censor those parts of the Bible. Nothing else is fair.
Moreover, the Bible does not specifically codemn those who satirically criticize Christians in the free marketplace of ideas. Even Christ asked forgiveness for the very people who were crucufying him. Neither are Christians to react harshly to critical statements. In fact, it instructs Christians to resist anger and react with love (Prov. 29:22, Matt. 5:22).
There are numerous other references I can site but I am tired and getting ready for bed.
My vote is always for a free, open exchange of ideas. I think censorship of any kind is wrong as it is man's attempt to impose his own morality forcefully on others. My faith is strong and I believe the Bible can hold its own in the marketplace of ideas. Christians who get their spiritual rocks off by bashing or persecuting homosexuals (or anyone else for that matter) are not demostrating any of the signs of true Christianity. And any Christian who feels they cannot take open criticism of their beliefs should take another look at their faith. To quote another great religious work:
"If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen"
- from Howard the Duck
P.S. This is not an attempt at flaming Clammy or spreading Christianity, just wanted to offer a contrasting viewpoint.
Let's see....Christ hung around with prostitues (John 4:7), tax collectors (Luke 19:2), beggars (Luke 18:35-43) and the worst of all.....children (Luke 18:16).Quote:
Originally posted by MacGyver
That is what Christ did time and time again, He hung out with the bad people who really needed Him and spoke out when it was warranted.
Ok maybe the children weren't so bad. I'll quit now.
:p
This whole Bible/homosexuality things is scarry. Why can't we just accept people for who they are? Don't these 'men of God' know that homosexuality occurs naturally in nature? Scientists have observed it in monkeys and other species. Like the human species it occurs in apes about 10% of the time.
Its a natural mutation, and I don't see anything 'sinful' about it. If you ask me I think the real sinners are those people who defy Christ's commandment to love another.
About 10% of apes also eat their young .Quote:
Originally posted by Orangeman
This whole Bible/homosexuality things is scarry. Why can't we just accept people for who they are? Don't these 'men of God' know that homosexuality occurs naturally in nature? Scientists have observed it in monkeys and other species. Like the human species it occurs in apes about 10% of the time.
Its a natural mutation, and I don't see anything 'sinful' about it. If you ask me I think the real sinners are those people who defy Christ's commandment to love another.
My example is only intended to show that mutations occur in nature and there is nothing we can do about it. - and it certainly isn't a sin if God created those 'sins.'Quote:
As for apes eating their young, I'm sure that early cavemen ate their young too. (before they learned to cook --- gosh, maybe they cooked their young too)
In regards to homosexuality occuring naturally in animals, this would indicate a temporary occurence, not a "lifestyle". 10% is a very high incidence rate and think that the percentage should be revised downwards, for starters. Personally, I try never to base my opinions on pre-digested stats, unique sources of data or Oprah. I'm just funny that way. ;)Quote:
Originally posted by Orangeman
This whole Bible/homosexuality things is scarry. Why can't we just accept people for who they are? Don't these 'men of God' know that homosexuality occurs naturally in nature? Scientists have observed it in monkeys and other species. Like the human species it occurs in apes about 10% of the time.
Its a natural mutation, and I don't see anything 'sinful' about it. If you ask me I think the real sinners are those people who defy Christ's commandment to love another.
In regards to the natural mutation argument, I would disagree also on the grounds that, for the most part, this mutation would never passed be on to the next generation and is self-defeating. I tend to lean more towards social/psychological sources for homosexuality, but it's a lot more complex than that.
Homosexuality is not genetic or inherited (for the same reasons as stated above). There are even documented cases of people having come out of homosexuality with and without psychotherapy. If it were genetic, identical twins should therefore both be homosexual, but that is not the case (50% incidence that such is the case)
Your last sentence is something I agree wholeheartedly with, but it seems to be confusing the lines between loving/accepting a person and loving/accepting what a person does. There is a line here that tends to be blurred.
I know this is a long one, but I also wanted to express my thanks to KINGofBLEH for his earlier post. I find it a fitting explanation of what the Bible does teach. You might have missed it:
PS - Please don't take my comments as a flame if you disagree with them. I'm currently studying this very topic from various angles (mostly psychological studies) and wanted to take the opportunity to adress some of the common misconceptions associated with homosexuality (which, unfortunately, are often promoted as facts by the mainstream media - think about where the money comes from) and christianity (hateful/fearful of anything not fitting the "proper mold").Quote:
Originally posted by KINGofBLEH
There is a difference between satire and sin (Rom. 1:27,28). The Bible does not call for Christians to ridicule homosexuals, even satirically (Titus 3:2). It does not call for Christians to persecute, harm or punish homosexuals (Rom. 12:14). It specifically states that judgement and punishment are the Lord's (Matt. 7:1-2,2 Tim. 4:1) and that Christians are to love all sinners no matter what their sin (Luke 6:35)...
A "sin", according to the biblical definition of it, is attempting to live without any regard to God or his will for our lives. In that, all humans fail. The original term carries the connotation of aiming at a target and missing it. It doesn't necessarily imply a moral transgression as such.Quote:
Originally posted by Orangeman
...- and it certainly isn't a sin if God created those 'sins.'...
In a nutshell, the Bible states that even though God did create the world (Earth and the universe), he placed it in the hands of mankind to manage it. The current state of the planet is a direct expression of man's management and not God's. This is also an argument for those who like to point out "If God exists, why is the planet/society/our country in such a mess?". The fact that the argument is even thought of indicates an acknowledgement of there being morality - which cannot be explained by naturalistic theories (but that's another topic altogether).
Hope this helps clarify things a bit.
I have always puzzled over the homophobia. Regardless of whether situation/genetics/nature/God created the mindset, I still don't understand why society insists that they "lead a normal sexual life" Surely being left to themselves the community will be self limiting.Quote:
Originally posted by a d e p t
In regards to the natural mutation argument, I would disagree also on the grounds that, for the most part, this mutation would never passed be on to the next generation and is self-defeating. I tend to lean more towards social/psychological sources for homosexuality, but it's a lot more complex than that.
The other problem I have is that the anti homosexual chapters mentioned in the article are in the OLD Testament, not the New...
Anyone also considered that homosexuality might now be ok with God because somehow the population has to level off?
Did God really set up this earth with the words "Go forth and multiply" and think that the earth would not be able to sustain all the fruit of his creations loins?
It has occurred to me more than once that fatal illnesses such cancer and various viral diseases are God's way of drawing lots. It does seem to me that we either have a major war or a major disease every couple or three generations which have the effect of removing thousands if not millions from this earth.
I believe that God was invented to explain the inexplicable... If you go back through the history of religions everyone has a creation story, each designed to answer the question, "what am I doing here?"
It could be argued that God does exist and He allows us to believe whatever we want, that's also fine with me BUT if you accept that God allows the freedom to believe as you wish, to sin or not to sin - in other words free will, how does that automatically give you the right to impose your beliefs on others?
OK I will shut up now, before I find myself trying to impose my beliefs on others.... ;)
So if I shouldn't take them as a 'flame' why did you put those words in fine print where I could possibly miss reading them? ?:flame: :D :D Okay, so by your own admission the incidence of homosexuality among identical twins is 50% - which is At Least 5x the incidence in the population at large. I don't know much about genetics but that sounds like a pretty good genetic argument to me:D :D :DQuote:
Originally posted by a d e p t
PS - Please don't take my comments as a flame if you disagree with them. ....
Have you ever been in a store and saw somethign just laying there with not a store clerk in site?
Your mind says I could take that and walk out of here so easily
or
It says I better not take that.
the first decision was from Satan the Enemy trying to lure you into his ways.
the second Decision was from God telling you to smarten up because you know better.
That is how simple sin is.
Everyone and I mean everyone deals with situations like this.
Unless of course they are so controlled by satan that the only thing stoping them from taking that somthign is a store clerk that walks into the picture. and to add to it they Curse that person under your breath.
or
Unless you are in tune with God so much that the thought doesnt even enter your mind or you decide to tell the store clerk that they left the store unattended for too long as a kind reminder.
These last 2 statements go for anything.
So whether you are controlled by satan or god in every move. you could be blind to that fact that you are sinning or being helpful.
Choose your faith its not hard.
The bible says that Homo sexuality is wrong so to a believer its not hard to figure out and to a non believer its a confussion set by satan to make anger and hatred in your heart.
The statment in the article says that is causes "hatred among people" is for the people who read bible verses out of context without the whole understanding of the christian faith.
Anyway its too early inthe morning to say anythign else.
go ahead and pick me apart. :D ;)
Okay, let me answer for myself.
Think about it for a brief moment. The Scientific Revolution was all about going back to the source. Before, (and I cannot remember whether the Protestant Reformation came first or not - I think not) the people relied on their priests to do the interpretation for them - aside from the fact that the Bible was in Latin at that time, and some 97% of the people couldn't read Latin...Quote:
Before I do end I will debate the statement that science was in any way shape or form responsible for twisting the words coming from the bible or causing people to take anything literally. I have yet to see a scientist who uses religion as a means to an empirical ending of an experiment but see quite a good deal of the religious who bastardize science to attempt to prove their faith. I should point out that science is in no way a belief but a system of gathering data and interpreting it and any theory welcomes open debate attempting to disprove it. Sorry, it just bugs me when the religious try to take a shot at a simple theorem that you need to give some shred of proof and to back up a hypothesis. Again, not trying to attack anyone, it just bugs the heck out of me.
Bull. As Jedilab mentioned, there's a [I]hell{/I] of a lot of difference (excuse the pun) between living in sin then repenting, and living in sin and not repenting.Quote:
To continue on with that thought, everyone is living in sin (not just homosexuals). This is what I find so amusing about Christians that criticize homosexuals. Yes, the homosexuals are living in sin, but so is everyone else. "Let ye without sin cast the first stone" (not an exact quote, but close enough).
And YEAH, did the cleetus merrily walk down the street arm and arm with his fellow bretheren(and sisteren, and couserin, and horserin and sheeperin and so forth) and they lived life the best they could, yeah though they did falter, they did sway, they did their mother, they lived life to the fullest, the treated everyone with respect, and they gave. For the cleetus had already left the church becuase he knew the true meanings, the truthtest to the teachings. Treat everyone well, give what you can to those less fortunate, and don't dwell on what really doesn't affectith you.
Here endeth the lesson.
It was also a trap laid out for Him; remember, this was a "crime" committed by the woman, but it does take two to tango, thus the "Those without sin..." phrase shifted the burden to those wishing to stone her.Quote:
Originally posted by Jediab
You are right, Jesus did say that. He said that about a woman that was about to be put to death by stoning for adultry.
The woman that Jesus saved made a mistake, a mistake that equaled a sin. Jesus was referring to making mistakes and forgiveness, not an ongoing lifestyle of sleeping with married husbands
Jesus expanded the commandment Thou Shall not Kill, to Thou shall not hate. If you don't hate, then you won't kill out of hate.
And "Thou shalt not kill" is a mis-translation, the original is "Thou shalt not murder." Killing as an act of self-defense was allowed, otherwise why would you "pick up your sword; if you have not, then sell your cloak to obtain one"....paraphased, I know, but the message is still there.
This topic could go on for weeks....
Well, I for one never considered this. I do know that God is not petty and will not change his mind, his teachings and his very own nature on a whim. He wouldn't be God if he wasn't constant.Quote:
Originally posted by NooNoo
...Anyone also considered that homosexuality might now be ok with God because somehow the population has to level off?...
Actually, I understand the earth (in the state it was originally created) could sustain life for much more population than we could anticipate, but that's another theological topic on its own. ;)Quote:
...Did God really set up this earth with the words "Go forth and multiply" and think that the earth would not be able to sustain all the fruit of his creations loins?...
Again, God is not capricious. He does not act detached and aloof from the plights of mankind. His desire is the spiritual, physical and emotional well-being of all humans. Unfortunately, war and pestilence have been wrongly attributed to the wrong guy throughout the middle ages and even today.Quote:
...It has occurred to me more than once that fatal illnesses such cancer and various viral diseases are God's way of drawing lots. It does seem to me that we either have a major war or a major disease every couple or three generations which have the effect of removing thousands if not millions from this earth...
Man does have free will. His decision to follow God would have no merit without it. As a matter of fact, free will is another argument for the existence of an "outside entity". But I fail to see how that gives anyone the right to impose their belief system upon others... I hope I'm not coming across like that myself personally.Quote:
...I believe that God was invented to explain the inexplicable... If you go back through the history of religions everyone has a creation story, each designed to answer the question, "what am I doing here?"
It could be argued that God does exist and He allows us to believe whatever we want, that's also fine with me BUT if you accept that God allows the freedom to believe as you wish, to sin or not to sin - in other words free will, how does that automatically give you the right to impose your beliefs on others?...
You and I and others have been sharing our viewpoints on this topic - and it's always a touchy one - but I do hope nothing appears like "preaching". :confused: ;)
I enjoy speaking on this topic as I've been researching world religions, thelogy and now recently psychology to better understand the purpose of human life. For me, years of studying this have all pointed me in the same direction and my beliefs are the culmination of this search.
The christian belief system is, IMO, the one which best fits the facts. It explains the current condition of man, his intended role, his drives and motivations. It offers hope that man can be and accomplish more than expected. Have you noticed that it is probably the only belief system which would have been un-natural or illogical for men to devise? Other popular religions do not require a lifestyle change and cater to man's ego: the improving of one's self. Christianity sets forth the precept that others are to be loved/respected/seen to/helped firstly. It points outwards (community) instead of inwards (individuality), as opposed to almost all other belief systems. It stands out in the "crowd" of other religions. Just food for thought. :)
Actually, the incidence of homosexuality in twins would be higher than that if genetic, as you seem to be assuming that 10% of the population is homosexual, which is not the case - it's lower. The concept remains that, logically, it should be 100% if it were genetically inherited. The fact that it is not is more supportive of the theory that it is socially/psychologically induced. In this case, their incidence rate would then be expected to be higher than "standard" as both twins are subjected to the same environment, more often than not.Quote:
Originally posted by Orangeman
So if I shouldn't take them as a 'flame' why did you put those words in fine print where I could possibly miss reading them? ?:flame: :D :D Okay, so by your own admission the incidence of homosexuality among identical twins is 50% - which is At Least 5x the incidence in the population at large. I don't know much about genetics but that sounds like a pretty good genetic argument to me:D :D :D
I do hope you were kidding about my flaming you, Orangeman. I'd hate to appear like I'm condescending. It just so happens that I do know a lot about this subject - enough to feel comfortable speaking openly about it.
My intentions are merely to inform, not convince.
In the end, it remains a personal choice what you'll believe about anything. That's the beaty of free will. I just wanted to make sure that more information was given on that particular topic so that the decision-making was not based on misinformation and disinformation.
It doesn't change the fact that homosexuals are human beings and should be respected as equals.
So who made the bacteria and viruses that cause disease and pestilence?Quote:
Again, God is not capricious. He does not act detached and aloof from the plights of mankind. His desire is the spiritual, physical and emotional well-being of all humans. Unfortunately, war and pestilence have been wrongly attributed to the wrong guy throughout the middle ages and even today.
Who makes volcanoes erupt? Earthquakes happen?
Would somebody please explain to me how a book that was written thousands of years ago, has been through many translations, and which nobody knows - with any real clarity - who wrote it, becomes infallible? - and that everything in there gets to be interpreted literally?
Of course I'm referring to the Bible. Even theologians who know much more about this subject than you or I will tell you that the 1st century Catholic Church, which choose which books to be included, decided that the books of Phillip and the book of Thomas were excluded. Why? Isn't that Man's judgement - not God's judgement, that being worked?
Also, do you really have so much faith in the 1st century Catholic Church to say that the Bible is infallible? Did it ever occur to anyone that they might be wrong?
The bible was given to us in every step by the divine intervention of the maker up above.
He is also the one that gave me my cousins and my sister and my chickens and my sheep, but told me not to covet my neighbors ***, He giveth and He taketh away.
Let us all bow our heads and for pete's sake, take that tobaccer out of yer mouth, I cn't take yous anywhere ma.
Please stop, I am going to sh!t my pants, I am laughing so hard....:D :DQuote:
Originally posted by Cleetus
The bible was given to us in every step by the divine intervention of the maker up above.
He is also the one that gave me my cousins and my sister and my chickens and my sheep, but told me not to covet my neighbors ***, He giveth and He taketh away.
Let us all bow our heads and for pete's sake, take that tobaccer out of yer mouth, I cn't take yous anywhere ma.
It certainly will if you bring up the concept of mistranslation. Don't even get me started on the whole Mary-Was-Never-Really-A-Virgin bit. Even Snopes shoots the Bible down on that one.Quote:
Originally posted by paraflyer
And "Thou shalt not kill" is a mis-translation, the original is "Thou shalt not murder." ...
...This topic could go on for weeks....
There are a number of people who believe that the Bible as we see it today was brought to us by God, and the various translations and mistranslations are all His will... that He WANTS the Bible to read exactly as it does today.
This seems to me spurious in the extreme. Bill Gates could easily produce the Bible 2.0, updated and corrected by the best theologians he can hire. Undoubtedly this would acquire a major following, especially if he got endorsement from the Pope. I see it as realistic that it could become more popular than the King James Bible (or whatever other version you follow.)
Would such a text then be the Word of God? Because by your logic it would be God's desire to have that version disseminated...
-
Regarding homosexuality, it is said by scientists (I know that religion doesn't regard science as an authority, but the feeling's entirely mutual) that any trait shared by at least 5% of the population has some genetic reason to exist. I think I know the answer to that. They did studies on rats, where they built little rat complexes and filled them up with rats to see how they lived. The complexes where rats had plenty of space resulted in "normal" rats. The complexes where rats were very crowded, although there was always plenty of food and water provided, resulted in violence, social problems with the rats, and a high level of homosexuality amongst the rat population.
This implies to me that homosexuality is a natural way to check overpopulation.
-
As an after thought I want to thank everybody for discussing this so rationally so far. This has the potential to explode and I'm still not sure it won't... :(
-
But in the end, all of you who believe quite plainly that homosexuality is a sin, you have lost a lot of my respect. Homosexuals do NOT have any choice in how they are born. They can't be "cured" or "fixed". While you as good Christians may be good, forgiving, intelligent people (and I recognize this is true in many cases here, for example MacGyver and Adept), the Bible is very clear on one thing--if you don't repent, you are going to Hell. And that attitude is the exact thing that pushes so many people out of the Christian religion. Including me.
If God does exist, and is omniscient, omnipotent, and all forgiving, then He will understand the flaws in the Bible, my troubles believing in it and forgive me for them.
If God is something other than the above, then I don't want to believe in or support him anyways.
Coming from a liberal non-christian - I have a different point of view. I think a lot of this is where someone comes from and what point of view they have on this.
I think the bible is a good book and makes a pretty good guide on how to live a good life - but I don't take it literally. I certainly don't understand how people can use it to justify their actions. If jesus knew what was done "in his name" - he'd be PISSED.
I don't believe in censorship of the bible, but I know several bible-thumpers that would happily censor Harry Potter "in the name of the lord".
I hate the things racists have to say and I think they're disgusting, but here in the US - they have the right to say and to think what they want. I have the right to object to that.
You have to realize that most people are reasonable people, but there's extremests on any side.
You have bible-thumpers-youre-burning-in-hell types.
You have uber-gay-in-your-face-activists.
By definition - I've been living in sin ( and its fun ). I live my life with respect, honor, and do what I think is right.
Religion in general is an elaborate joke played on you by space aliens. We Klingons have proof.
Not here, not now... PM or IM me if you'd like to debate this further. ;)Quote:
Originally posted by Wayward Clam
It certainly will if you bring up the concept of mistranslation. Don't even get me started on the whole Mary-Was-Never-Really-A-Virgin bit. Even Snopes shoots the Bible down on that one...
Actually, the argument you've used here is proving my own viewpoint - that homosexuality stems from social and psychological sources, not natural heredity. But I think we agree on the basics here.Quote:
...Regarding homosexuality, it is said by scientists (I know that religion doesn't regard science as an authority, but the feeling's entirely mutual) that any trait shared by at least 5% of the population has some genetic reason to exist. I think I know the answer to that. They did studies on rats, where they built little rat complexes and filled them up with rats to see how they lived. The complexes where rats had plenty of space resulted in "normal" rats. The complexes where rats were very crowded, although there was always plenty of food and water provided, resulted in violence, social problems with the rats, and a high level of homosexuality amongst the rat population.
This implies to me that homosexuality is a natural way to check overpopulation...
By the way, I'm one who loves science and I have an analytical mind. This doesn't stop me from believing things, either scientifically or spiritually, that cannot (yet) be proven. Science is not infallible either.
Actually, homosexuality is "curable" (I can back this up) while at the same time I concur that the large majority of homosexuals do not have a choice in their orientation. I also agree that it is a sin. Why that should bother anyone who doesn't hold the Bible as true eludes me, but I know we can still continue a respectful and logical discourse, right?Quote:
...But in the end, all of you who believe quite plainly that homosexuality is a sin, you have lost a lot of my respect. Homosexuals do NOT have any choice in how they are born. They can't be "cured" or "fixed"...
Homosexuality is no more a problem to deal with for God than those born with a violent disposition or alcoholics - it's just another facet of the sinful nature of man today.
God forgives when man repents (turns away from his previous way of life), so there's a certain dilemma here... ;pQuote:
...the Bible is very clear on one thing--if you don't repent, you are going to Hell. And that attitude is the exact thing that pushes so many people out of the Christian religion. Including me.
If God does exist, and is omniscient, omnipotent, and all forgiving, then He will understand the flaws in the Bible, my troubles believing in it and forgive me for them.
If God is something other than the above, then I don't want to believe in or support him anyways.
As I've said before, a "sin' is man's failed attempt to achieve a goal without regard to God's will in the matter. Sins don't hurt God - they harm mankind (individually and colllectively) and that is why God hates it. He never hates a person.
Apart from the "theory", I can attest to numerous occasions where I saw or felt the presence of God in my life. This relationship with God is liberating and a constant source of joy for me. It makes me a better person to follow God's recommandations regarding "sin" in general. His presence casts waves in my physical, emotional, and spiritual life.
This is so much more interesting than chess, no? :D
Enlighten me on "curable".Quote:
Actually, homosexuality is "curable" (I can back this up) while at the same time I concur that the large majority of homosexuals do not have a choice in their orientation. I also agree that it is a sin. Why that should bother anyone who doesn't hold the Bible as true eludes me, but I know we can still continue a respectful and logical discourse, right?
I have a hard time grasping what you are saying since I don't believe in the god you believe in. I'm not trying to start anything ugly. I really do try to understand where you come from.
So what if someone decides to do their "own thing". They live their lives, you live yours. Be courdial when you meet in the shopping market aisle. All's well.
And Judith slept with the General of the enemy, and the cut off his head which they placed on the gates of the city. Of course, then again, most of your bibles don't have the book of Judith, and I will never sleep with one of the women of the enemy until her town is defeated.