gay anti gay?
- Started
- Last post
- 159 Responses
- gramme0
No lvl13, I had a couple gay friends back when I lived in Baltimore, (during college) but I lost touch with them years ago. So I guess they were never *really* close friends, since I still keep in touch with most good friends I've ever known, regardless of where they live.
- CALLES0
you guys are weird
- ukit0
I think you guys need to consider a third possibility....Was Jesus Gay?
- lvl_130
i don't really want to jump in this, but i just got to ask one simple question gramme (and forgive me if this has already been brought up. i have read through the thread on a 'clif notes' style):
do you have any close gay friends? i'm not talking about people you talk to randomly, or hang out with every once in a while. i am talking about people that you would consider a true close friend? someone you know you could confide in that was gay?
- CALLES0
i went out yesterday... came back to check my email... and you guys still on this? whack
different point of view, different people, let it go
- GeorgesII0
Gramme your knowledge of the bible amazes me,
I find it harder these days to even have a decent theological discussion with people because everyone assumes you're brain dead for just implying you read the bible.
- gramme0
Aye, they do indeed Bart. But I do fervently believe that corduroy skirts are a sin.
;)
- GeorgesII0
How come everyone feels free to pound continuously on christian but are pretty silent on muslim and jews.
while we're at it, let discuss it like adults, because I don't think the torah or the coran is big on homosexuality
- Kiggen0
Lets all be eucimenical guys. I respect Gramme for this his beliefs and what a nice place it would be if all believers where as moderate as him. I'm an atheist myself, but i do like to approach religion on a philosophical way.
- gramme0
The only person posting in this thread who believes it, you mean. A fact which, incidentally, doesn't mean a damn thing to me. Why exactly does this bother you?
There are plenty of people who believe all the things I wrote above, who are neither insane, simplistic, or deluded. I'm sure that also concerns you very deeply. Or perhaps you're like Dr. Bombay, & co., and refuse to believe that sane, rational, intelligent people can be Christians and contribute to society all at the same time.
Speaking of bullshit, I recommend doing a little more research the next time you attempt to dismantle Christianity or any other system of belief.
- sane, rational, and christian don't belong in the same sentence together, and i don't take recommendations from superstitious sheepscarabin
- superstitious sheepscarabin
- LOLgramme
- This from a guy who follows Crowley?locustsloth
- Anton LaVey disapproves of this threadgramme
- i read everything, locustscarabin
- I'm deluded, as an oto member I would have thought you were more open minded...GeorgesII
- What's oto?gramme
- Ordo Templi Orientis
GeorgesII
- scarabin0
you're the only one convinced by that bullshit, gramme, and it concerns me that you are
- tOki0
^
great for testing mousewheel at high speeds.
- gramme0
Wow. This is amazing. @ scarabin, Josev, and DrBombay (mrdobolina, right?): I'm not sure how you guys got some of these ideas about Christianity and the Bible. I know I said I was done with this thread, but I think there are some things worth addressing here.
monospaced: to answer your questions. Believing Jesus is believing the rest of the Bible, given the claims he made to old prophetic fulfillment. I for one do not just pick and choose what I like. I believe it’s all good for instruction and edification. About people who never hear the gospel, St. Paul says in Romans that there is sufficient evidence of God’s divinity given in nature that mankind is without excuse.
monkeyshine, I’m sorry you had such a terrible experience with the southern fundies. I hope you know it’s not like that everywhere.
On sexual preference: Paul lists in 1 Corinthians 6:9–10 a number of immoral traits/activities: “promiscuity, idolatry, adultery, homosexuality, thievery, greed...” the list goes one. But he goes on to offer this hopeful word: “And such were some of you [speaking to Greek Christians in Corinth], but you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ....”
Josev, the article you linked to above doesn’t back up any of its arguments or anecdotes about homosexuality with applicable scripture. The few quoted passages are broad in meaning and misappropriated from their original context. Besides that, all they use are modern-day stories, some of which do certainly tell immoral atrocities done by Christians who twisted the Bible to suit their own agendas, but don't reinforce their theories about the Bible's supposed silence regarding sexual preference. Some good places to start:
Scarabin, I’m curious: why the vehemence? Have you had bad experiences with the church in the past? I’m genuinely interested. Your pronouncements and misappropriated quotes come off like entries from an angry teenager’s blog, and I can’t believe there isn’t some background story here.
Let’s take it from the top.
There are passages in the Bible which contain poor grammar, run-on sentences, etc. These are human idiosyncrasies which are apparent in the text. These don’t discount the veracity of the Bible as God’s inspired letter to mankind; in fact, they make it all the more marvelous that such a complete picture of God’s character and redemptive story could be told. Some of it is really boring; other parts are poetry and narrative of the highest quality. There are, however, no contradictions in the entire Bible. I’ve looked high and low for them. E.g., just when you think there’s a contradiction between the story of Jesus’ life told in Matthew vs. what’s in John, you realize that Matthew is basically chronological in structure, and John is topical. So they cover different events, from different angles, at different points in the narratives.
For every book of the Bible, we still have physical copies of either primary, second, or third generation texts. They are scattered across various museums and libraries around the world. We also have access to original ancient Hebrew and Greek, the two primary languages of the Bible. The ability for a contemporary scholar to learn these languages and read the passages in their native tongues provides tremendous benefit. There are many words, idioms, and phrases which simply don’t translate well into English, French, Mandarin, etc.
There are some parts of the Bible which are hard to understand, such as almost every verse of Revelations. Revelations is shrouded in deep symbolism and metaphor, and has been foolishly used by many modern-day people to try and predict end-time events. But for the most part, the Bible is either prose, poetry, or sermon. Almost all of it can be parsed from a 5th grade reading level; some passages even seem simplistic as they repeatedly drive a point home.
As with any piece of literature, context is king in determining meaning. So let’s talk about context in some of these examples given by scarabin and Josev.
In the Old Testament (the Jewish Torah), God made a series of covenants, or pacts, with his people Israel. All of these covenants looked forward to a savior, a Messiah, a second Adam who would pay eternal atonement for the sins of God’s people. The old covenant was fulfilled in a new covenant through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. After Jesus, sacrifices were no longer necessary.
Meanwhile, back in the bronze age, God through Moses gave Israel the Ten Commandments and the greater law, which prescribed a host of rules, regulations, and ceremonies. This law was impossible to follow perfectly. It was meant in large part to show the Israelites their deep need for grace. The animal and grain sacrifices they offered were merely symbols which pointed forward to a future savior. Back then, Israel did not know how exactly this would happen, but the devout ones trusted that God would somehow provide.
Furthermore, the old covenant contained many laws, some seemingly silly, outlandish, or brutal by today’s standards. Many of those laws were abolished in the new covenant, when Christ paid all past, present, and future sacrificial requirements. This is why, for example, most modern Christians do not wear prayer tassels, require men to wear beards, or do just about any of the things scarabin mentions from Leviticus. All these ceremonies, these rules, pointed to Israel’s imperfection and need for salvation. It *really* had to be driven home with them, every day, because they were a stubborn people and were surrounded by rival nations who would offer up mass human sacrifices, hold enormous orgies, etc.
The passages you guys mention from Deuteronomy and Leviticus are the application core of the Old Testament Jewish law. Here’s a great summary and way to look at it from an essay I found in an ESV Study Bible:
“The ethical application of Old Testament law is a complex issue. ... While many OT laws will not be kept by Christians to the letter, the laws embody important and abiding principles for Christian ethical behavior. Sometimes those OT principles are modified in the New Testament; often they are reinforced. For instance, the sacrificial system finds its fulfillment in the cross of Christ, but the principles of OT sacrifice are still instructive for Christians.
“As a further example, the laws that define sexual morality and the principles underlying those laws are unchanged in the NT. Indeed, Jesus shows the deeper intent of the laws on sexual matters in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:27–30). However, the laws in Deuteronomy on warfare are not repeated for the New Testament church because God’s people are no longer a nation and the land to be inherited is now heavenly (1 Peter 1:4). Nonetheless, the principles of maintaining the holiness of God’s people and of God judging sin remain unchanged.
“It is important to recognize that there are different kinds of laws and rules in Deuteronomy [and Leviticus]. Many of the specific laws, especially those that detail penalties that judges are to impose, do not intend to spell out the ethical ideas for God’s people; their main function is to set the minimum standard of behavior needed to protect Israel’s theocracy.”
scarabin, you misinterpret the Luke passage. First of all, in this context "hating" is a Semitic expression for loving less. What Christ is saying here is that if anyone loves God less than his family or even his own life, he cannot be Christ's disciple. Jesus is not suggesting that anyone should dishonor their parents or other family members. In fact, one of his last acts on earth, while struggling to breathe on the cross, he entrusted his mother Mary to the care and support of John, one of the twelve disciples.
One more thing scarabin: there are NO scriptures which condone racism, hatred of women, bigotry, hatred of gays, or murder. Find me a passage that actually condones any of those things, back it up with the broader context it's set in, and I'll believe you.
Josev, the first Mark paraphrase is wrong. The OT and NT both condemn divorce, except for in cases of abandonment or adultery. Furthermore, if a person's spouse has left a marriage, the one left is free to remarry. The one who breaks the marriage vows continues to commit adultery by marrying someone else; but once in that marriage, they are bound to the new set of vows they made.
Your second Mark quote is taken out of context. It's actually a conjectural, non-actual story offered up by Jesus' religious opponents, who hoped to used the law of Moses to catch Jesus in saying something blasphemous. They said "Moses wrote for us that if a man's brother dies and leaves a wife, but leaves no child, the man must take the widow and raise up offspring for his brother. There were seven brothers; the first took a wife, and when he died left no offspring. And the second took her, and died, leaving no offspring. And the third likewise. And the seven left no offspring. Last of all the woman also died. After the resurrection, when they rise again, whose wife will she be? For the seven had her as wife."
Jesus answered them: " Is this not the reason you are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God? For when they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. And as for the dead being raised, have you not read in the book of Moses, 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. You are quite wrong."
- Who am I kidding, no one will read this. At least my eyes hurt now.gramme
- Ach, nevermind the "good places to start." Was going to post verses for reference.gramme
- Too tired now. Must rest.gramme
- so.... ummm......
is it gay to be anti gay?pango - Yeah, that explanation doesn't work for me. I can't believe it satisfies you.monospaced
- Sorry it doesn't work for you. And believe it or not, it satisfies me.gramme
- See, I'm working from the premise that none of us deserve salvation, so anyone who is among God's chosen is getting an undeserved blessinggramme
- getting an undeserved blessing of cosmic proportions.gramme
- tOki0
- CALLES0
And on a final note before I go out and interact with real people
Y'all gotta get over yourselfs. You all sound like a bunch of pussys\fags
