British Lions rugby legend Gareth Thomas comes out - Page 5 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 12-29-2009, 09:34 PM   #61
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,687
Local Time: 09:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalton View Post
Are you saying that the refusal to bless same-sex marriages is synonymous with homophobia?
Yes

The truth is out there yet they've allowed misinterpretations of texts due to their own biases. Not only that but they've actively tried to reach beyond their own governance and force their beliefs onto a secular society which shows me there is contempt.

They haven't tried to force the bible's view on gluttony, divorce, or any other of the nonsensical laws found in Leviticus... why this one?

I can only think of one answer.
__________________

__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2009, 09:38 PM   #62
Blue Crack Addict
 
Dalton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Little hand says it's time to rock and roll.
Posts: 15,147
Local Time: 11:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Yes

The truth is out there yet they've allowed misinterpretations of texts due to their own biases. Not only that but they've actively tried to reach beyond their own governance and force their beliefs onto a secular society which shows me there is contempt.

They haven't tried to force the bible's view on gluttony, divorce, or any other of the nonsensical laws found in Leviticus... why this one?

I can only think of one answer.
Misinterpretations of the texts? Are you disagreeing with theologians who have spent their entire lives reading the original texts?
__________________

__________________
Dalton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2009, 09:39 PM   #63
Blue Crack Addict
 
Dalton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Little hand says it's time to rock and roll.
Posts: 15,147
Local Time: 11:00 AM
BTW - this response is as narrow minded as those from "believers" who try to characterize all homosexuals as pedophiles and deviants.
__________________
Dalton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2009, 09:54 PM   #64
Blue Crack Addict
 
Dalton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Little hand says it's time to rock and roll.
Posts: 15,147
Local Time: 11:00 AM
btw - where in the fuck is irvine? At least he would have laughed at the "kicking balls" joke. You lot must be fantastic at funerals.
__________________
Dalton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2009, 10:05 PM   #65
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,687
Local Time: 09:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalton View Post
Misinterpretations of the texts? Are you disagreeing with theologians who have spent their entire lives reading the original texts?
Based on my research, yes... Those that have seen and studied the original text and came to the conclusion that homosexuality is explicitly called out as a sin post Jesus would be wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalton View Post
BTW - this response is as narrow minded as those from "believers" who try to characterize all homosexuals as pedophiles and deviants.
How so?
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2009, 10:12 PM   #66
Blue Crack Addict
 
Dalton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Little hand says it's time to rock and roll.
Posts: 15,147
Local Time: 11:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Based on my research, yes... Those that have seen and studied the original text and came to the conclusion that homosexuality is explicitly called out as a sin post Jesus would be wrong.
Fair enough. But you recognize that this puts you at odds with some of the greatest christian theologians in history. Men and women (in the last hundred years) that have spent their entire lives reading the original texts as well. I don't believe that discredits your beliefs, but you were quick to throw that out earlier.

I've come down on the other side of this argument. I've read much of the pertinent work on both sides of this debate as well as the bible itself and I would say that any reading of the text that comes down on the side of the bible not calling homosexuality a sin is terrible exegesis that begins with an agenda and not good work.

That's coming from a guy that believes homosexuals should be free to do what they want and who doesn't believe the bible has any magical powers or divine authority.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
How so?
I've answered this question.
__________________
Dalton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2009, 10:21 PM   #67
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,238
Local Time: 09:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Yes

The truth is out there yet they've allowed misinterpretations of texts due to their own biases. Not only that but they've actively tried to reach beyond their own governance and force their beliefs onto a secular society which shows me there is contempt.

They haven't tried to force the bible's view on gluttony, divorce, or any other of the nonsensical laws found in Leviticus... why this one?

I can only think of one answer.
You're lumping an awful lot of people together there, BVS. I don't think that everyone who believes the Bible says homosexuality is a sin is also trying to contemptuously reach beyond their own governance to force their beliefs onto a secular society.

Lets try and keep the debate a little less histrionic, shall we?
__________________
Diemen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2009, 10:32 PM   #68
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,687
Local Time: 09:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diemen View Post
You're lumping an awful lot of people together there, BVS. I don't think that everyone who believes the Bible says homosexuality is a sin is also trying to contemptuously reach beyond their own governance to force their beliefs onto a secular society.

Lets try and keep the debate a little less histrionic, shall we?
Do you believe gay marriage would even be an issue if it wasn't for the church? Yes, I'm lumping "the church" together, but what I mean is the imaginary collective of mainstream organized Christian religion.
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2009, 10:34 PM   #69
Blue Crack Addict
 
Dalton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Little hand says it's time to rock and roll.
Posts: 15,147
Local Time: 11:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Do you believe gay marriage would even be an issue if it wasn't for the church? Yes, I'm lumping "the church" together, but what I mean is the imaginary collective of mainstream organized Christian religion.
Actually this question is a major theme in a work that I would commend to you: Slaves, Women & Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis by William Webb. You'll disagree with him entirely, but he articulates his case well.
__________________
Dalton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2009, 10:45 PM   #70
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,687
Local Time: 09:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalton View Post
Fair enough. But you recognize that this puts you at odds with some of the greatest christian theologians in history. Men and women (in the last hundred years) that have spent their entire lives reading the original texts as well. I don't believe that discredits your beliefs, but you were quick to throw that out earlier.

I've come down on the other side of this argument. I've read much of the pertinent work on both sides of this debate as well as the bible itself and I would say that any reading of the text that comes down on the side of the bible not calling homosexuality a sin is terrible exegesis that begins with an agenda and not good work.
Here's the very cliff notes version: It's mentioned in Leviticus which debatably is negated once Jesus came. If it's not negated then I want those theologians arguing for a law that forces the woman to be kicked out of bed when she's mensturating. The only other mention is Paul, who oddly takes the same phrasing from Leviticus. So then the big debate comes down to, is this God's word or Paul's bias? Is a book that's been written by man, translated by man and published by companies that have had spelling and gramatical errors God's word or inspired by, is it inerrant?
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2009, 10:54 PM   #71
Blue Crack Addict
 
Dalton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Little hand says it's time to rock and roll.
Posts: 15,147
Local Time: 11:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Here's the very cliff notes version: It's mentioned in Leviticus which debatably is negated once Jesus came. If it's not negated then I want those theologians arguing for a law that forces the woman to be kicked out of bed when she's mensturating. The only other mention is Paul, who oddly takes the same phrasing from Leviticus. So then the big debate comes down to, is this God's word or Paul's bias? Is a book that's been written by man, translated by man and published by companies that have had spelling and gramatical errors God's word or inspired by, is it inerrant?
Wow BVS, even for a cliff notes version, that summary is so thin and riddled with inaccuracies that it's hard to take seriously. It's cool if you haven't studied this subject. It's a pretty backwater subject in 21st Century America. But why spend your time arguing on the internet about a subject you don't have a good grasp on?
__________________
Dalton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2009, 11:16 PM   #72
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,687
Local Time: 09:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalton View Post
Wow BVS, even for a cliff notes version, that summary is so thin and riddled with inaccuracies that it's hard to take seriously. It's cool if you haven't studied this subject. It's a pretty backwater subject in 21st Century America. But why spend your time arguing on the internet about a subject you don't have a good grasp on?
Please enlighten me... where are the inaccuracies?
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2009, 11:34 PM   #73
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,294
Local Time: 10:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
Bascally this is not an organisation worthy of my support in any way, even tacit. As a committed doctrinaire atheist, the funerals and weddings thing is tricky for me. I would hope I will never attend mass or confession again (and indeed haven't done for years) but if I stopped going to funerals or weddings it could be deemed offensive by the type of people who put a lot of store in these rituals.
I think if I had failed to attend my grandmother's funeral based on your sort of position it would not only be offensive and hurtful to my family, but to her. You go there to pay respects to the deceased, and for better or worse, she was a very pious woman. My views of the Church or its political or social stances take a secondary position to my respect for my grandmother and all she did for me over the 29 years that I was lucky to have her.

Isn't even a hard decision for me.
__________________
anitram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2009, 12:23 AM   #74
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 10:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalton View Post
Fair enough. But you recognize that this puts you at odds with some of the greatest christian theologians in history. Men and women (in the last hundred years) that have spent their entire lives reading the original texts as well. I don't believe that discredits your beliefs, but you were quick to throw that out earlier.

I've come down on the other side of this argument. I've read much of the pertinent work on both sides of this debate as well as the bible itself and I would say that any reading of the text that comes down on the side of the bible not calling homosexuality a sin is terrible exegesis that begins with an agenda and not good work.

That's coming from a guy that believes homosexuals should be free to do what they want and who doesn't believe the bible has any magical powers or divine authority.
As mentioned earlier, I've outlined ad infinitum et ad nauseum as to why modern homosexuality just flat out does not exist in the Bible. Perhaps it is most simply and blatantly obvious in that "homosexuality," as a word and as a term referring to sexual orientation, just flat out did not exist until the 19th century. Less obvious to those who don't study dead languages would be the source texts that etymologically confirm that all the supposed references to "homosexuality" in the Bible are actually references to archaic practices that died in Antiquity that have nothing to do with modern homosexuality.

Of course, that's presuming that Biblical fundamentalism even matters, which it doesn't in my own Catholic theological tradition. Because I'd rather not repeat myself, I'll let one of my favourite theologians, James Alison, do it for me:

“But the Bible says...”? A Catholic reading of Romans 1 - by James Alison

Quote:
What has pushed me in the direction of offering this reading is really two things: in the first place, I was brought up Evangelical Protestant, and this text, Romans 1, was really a text of terror for me, a text in some way associated with a deep emotional and spiritual annihilation, something inflicting paralysis. So, finding myself ever freer of that terror, it seems proper to try and offer a road map to others who, whatever their ecclesial belonging, may suffer from the same binding of conscience that a certain received reading of this text has seemed to impose. But there is a second reason, no less important to my mind: owing to arguments surrounding Episcopal appointments in the Anglican Church on both sides of the Atlantic, a huge amount of press has been generated in which it has been repeated ad nauseam that “The Bible is quite clear...” about this or that. Furthermore we are told time and again that those who think either that gay people should be allowed to marry, or that being gay should be no bar to Episcopal consecration, are in some way repudiating an obvious written sacred injunction. The impression that “the Bible is quite clear” has passed largely unchallenged in the media, which has found it easiest to present the argument as being between conservative people who take the Bible seriously (and are thus against gay people) and liberal people who don't (and thus aren't against gay people).

Well, what is being treated to public travesty here is the Bible. Indeed it seems to me that if anything, the truth is closer to being exactly the other way round: you need a very modern liberal reading of the Bible in order to make it a weapon against gay people, and those who refuse to do this are, by and large, much more traditional in their Biblical reading habits. But this sounds so counterintuitive in our world that I'd like to take time to show that there is at least one perfectly respectable Catholic way to read this text which enables us to see it in quite a different light.
Enjoy.
__________________
melon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2009, 12:34 AM   #75
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 10:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by the iron horse View Post
I am a believer in that rebel from Nazareth.

I believe he was God.

I also believe in the scriptures, he often quoted.

Homosexuality is a sin. It's not right. It's not a gay life at all.


One of my best friends was homosexual, he killed himself at he age of 47.
Oh where to begin and where to end... Perhaps it's best to pray that you'll understand why this is illogical and incorrect without me having to give a lecture.

All the best.
__________________

__________________
melon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Rate my album collection. shart1780 Lemonade Stand Archive 75 02-14-2008 12:07 AM
UK Sailors taken hostage by Iranian Forces Justin24 Free Your Mind Archive 0 03-23-2007 11:18 AM
revolution? what revolution? souLnation2002 It's A Musical Journey 20 08-08-2002 03:23 PM
Dave Thomas founder of Wendy's dies wannabe Lemonade Stand Archive 14 01-08-2002 11:03 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com