The bible and homosexuality: Round 3

As an old and dear friend.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Because that is old law that Jesus changed. Some people still go for eye for an eye. You mean you can't get the implimications of this?
IT's pretty obvious to me what God intended for us by this scripture. Notice it doesn't say man left man. Of course it doesn't, it wasn't accepted. Yep yep. I agree, and thats wrong too. As soon as you stick it in the poop chute, your immoral. Amoung other things.Being gay is considered being sexually immoral.
One interpretation of the bible even says homsexual.1 Corinthians 6:9
Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offendersIts so clear.

I'm not a bible basher so I'll leave this to those who are more literate with the bible. What implimications? One of the most emphasized concept in college that profs try to get students to get is to understand that there are more than one interpretation of anything. Just because something is obvious to you doesn't mean it is obvious to others. I've reread that passage and I still don't see any implication. The only thing I can see is your prejudice guiding your interpretation. Notice that the bible never mentioned any car, airplane, computer, etc... Does that mean that it is not ok to use any of these things? So, you've finally admitted that it's all interpreted by people like you who had a preconcieved notion (you admitted it in another post) about the matter before translating. We've been through this. Please go back to earlier posts and read them carefully. I'll accept this statement if you accept my following unsupported statement: you are an idiot.

---

The Laminator

​

quote:

---

Mat 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

---

bad translation.

quote:

---

It seems clear that arsenokoites does not refer to mutually respecting gay relationships, but to a powerful aggressor subjugating a weaker individual, whether in the context of rape, or slave trading.

---

http://www.geocities.com/pharsea/Greeks.html

It mentions about material things, isn't that enough? Its not me being prejudice, its you being angry towards Christians. Thanks dude. You have just summed up who you are by doing that.
I still Love you, even if you call me an idiot.Peace.

I want to learn more about ancient slavery.Weren't there good rulers and bad rulers?Jesus did not chnage the law, but I guess he added to it. He was pretty animate about not changing the law, otherwise he would have been killed for ir, which he was.

or you'd know that there were cars and time travelers and Cd-Roms and DVDs and Computers and ... But there are sects that believe that many such devices should not be used and for just that reason. The Amish come to mind.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Explain to me what my prejudices are? I don't agree with you or homosexuality so I'm prejudice. I justify my BELIEFS not prejudices. And there has been more than enough people here giving Biblical passages to show where we are getting our reasoning for not going along with the world views of homosexuality. You just don't listen, which is typical of most nonbelieving liberals ( I'm just guessing you're a liberal, not far off I bet. ) -ZThis message has been edited by Zachariah, 07-03-2004 12:42 PM

Zach, if you expect anyone to take you seriously you simply must quit saying things like "I don't agree with you or homosexuality...". Saying you don't "agree with" homosexuality makes no sense. What is there to agree with? It exists! There's nothing you can do to make it go away.It's quite clear you are opposed to gay rights. It's also clear that you want us to believe that your opposition to gay rights comes from your interpretation of scripture (based on the tone of your rhetoric I suspect there's much more to it in your case, but we'll leave that alone for now).As is typical of bigoted, reactionary conservatives, you seem to be trying to make the case that you are not prejudiced. Do you not understand what prejudice is? It is to pre-judge. You have passed judgement on all homosexuals as sinful people simply because of something you believe, not something you can demonstrate to be true. No matter how you interpret the bible, you have no more than the bible to back up your beliefs. This is the very essence of prejudice; you, sir, are therefore quite prejudiced! Stop trying to make the absurd case that you aren't.

i guess. i dunno much on the subject. an addition is a change. although, the verse says "destroy" but whatever. and he was killed, technically, for being a revolutionary against csar (a lie). the reason the sanhedrin had him killed was that he challenged their authority, not their law.

contradiction. See what you can find out and then tell me what you found out.

1) IF Original Sin is a valid possible concept, it does not matter what the collective sum of human rights passions may lead to.
2) The basic argument against homosexual passion is that humanity has elevated the right to idealize (idolize) the human form above the responsibility to honor God. Heterosexual lust and idealized SI swimsuit images are no less evil than any Gay image.
3) Admittedly, we need to understand fundamentalists. They are no better than anyone else. The sin among them is that they proclaim superior morality. The truth is that the image that they profess to worship is in ideal, flawless.(Jesus Christ) The reality, however, is that fundies fail as often as any Pagan on the planet. Lets forgive the fundies and cut them a bit of slack. Bottem line: Do we worship God or do we worship the glory of the human form be it male or female? Homosexual feelings are not rare, and are no more a sin than lusting after the girl at the Supermarket. Again, the sin is in the elevation of thinking towards creature worship. Gays would rather defend the right to be with each other more than the responsibility to love Jesus first. Same sin with male/female couples who defend the right to do whatever they want to do regardless of the Church.
I agree, however, that the Church is very conservative. At least in theory. (Altar boy idolatry is also a very pesky sin.)This message has been edited by Phatboy, 07-07-2004 09:31 AM

well, if we take leviticus's word, grasshoppers are flying creatures that walk on four legs.but, well, they cover that elsewhere. and i'm fairly certain that grasshoppers have six legs.i think "on all fours" is an expression meaning that the primary mode of transportation for the animals is hopping or walking, as opposed to flying. or something. i'm not exactly sure, because BOTH references just sound flat-out silly.editted to add:although, on second thought, there was another sort of animal that flew like a bird, but walked on four legs on land: a pterodactyl. that's even sillier. more likely to be talking about flying squirrels. (don't eat rocky!)This message has been edited by Arachnophilia, 07-04-2004 01:54 AM

I thought he was killed for saying that he would tear down the church, and rebuild it in three days. Except the rulers left out the rebuild part, to make him look like he said he would just destroy the church.

Ok, just got back from another state. Been on a trip for the holiday weekend. Talking about picking a choosing whatever from the bible that fits your preconcieved notions. The reason I'm angry towards christians like you is because it's christians like you that have used the bible to justify just about every atrocity done in the past: from the crusades to the slaughtering of the native americans to the enslavement of various races. At least we agree on something.

---

The Laminator

​