11 states vote on gay marriage - Page 16 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-14-2004, 10:39 PM   #226
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,667
Local Time: 03:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


The best way to interpret Scripture is to compare it with other Scripture. You may wave isolated references to practices that no longer occur today, but there are plenty of references across the Old and New Testament that identify sexual behaviors as sin, including same sex sexual relations.

It really isn't a matter of what it says (Scripture is clear on this point) it is a matter of how you respond.
Hey NBC can you show me where in the NT is speaks about homosexuality? I've never seen it before and I'm curious.

Thanks.
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 05:01 AM   #227
Refugee
 
MadelynIris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Craggy Island
Posts: 1,504
Local Time: 04:42 AM
Romans 1 is one place.

http://www.biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/...+1&version=NIV

Backround - Paul writing to the Roman Church, where he described some national sins of the Roman Empire.
__________________

__________________
MadelynIris is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 05:39 AM   #228
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 01:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


Hey NBC can you show me where in the NT is speaks about homosexuality? I've never seen it before and I'm curious.

Thanks.

The two most direct references are Romans 1:27 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10.

Other references are more general in nature regarding sexual sins.

In all cases, homosexuality is not held out as a unique sin, but is included as part of other sexual sins and sins in general.

It should not be elevated as sin, nor should it be stricken.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 06:33 AM   #229
New Yorker
 
Sherry Darling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,857
Local Time: 05:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


The best way to interpret Scripture is to compare it with other Scripture. You may wave isolated references to practices that no longer occur today, but there are plenty of references across the Old and New Testament that identify sexual behaviors as sin, including same sex sexual relations.

It really isn't a matter of what it says (Scripture is clear on this point) it is a matter of how you respond.
Yes, but this doesn't quite address my specific point. What is your theological rationale for choosing to see these scriptures as literal, and not the others that I noted? I think your description of my post as "waving isolated references" is dismissive and inaccurate. Paul went on in the NT for quite some time about me needing to keep quiet in church and have long hair. This is repeated in the NT, as I'm sure you're aware. So why do we ignore these texts today, or interpret them as a product of the times, but choose to interpret the texts on homosexuality differently?

Peace,
Cheryl
__________________
Sherry Darling is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 07:58 AM   #230
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 01:42 AM
Yes, I am aware of 1 Corinthians 14 and 1 Timothy 2. Both are instructions on orderly worship. Are they to be read as rules or precepts? It is not clear. I think it is poor theology to declare everything a rule as the only "literal" interpretation. It certainly does not call it sinful for a woman to speak in church or wear their hair uncovered.

Now, given the passages I quoted above, how do you interpret them? I've heard different methods of dismissing the different passages - but there has been no consistent, principled method of explaining away these passages.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 11:33 AM   #231
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 05:42 AM
Thank you MadelynIris for the link. I would post a certain few verses that defined your point best, but I'm trying HARD not to piss anyone off.
__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 11:41 AM   #232
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,667
Local Time: 03:42 AM
We're still picking and choosing and not being consistent. If you are going to take what Paul says as God's word you should take everything he says as God's word. Another thing to consider is that all sexual activity outside marriage is considered a sin by Paul, so it wouldn't matter if it was hetero or homo.

I'm just not sure if this really convinces me that homosexuality is a sin.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 12:13 PM   #233
Refugee
 
MadelynIris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Craggy Island
Posts: 1,504
Local Time: 04:42 AM
BonoVoxSupastar,

I don't think Paul was saying that the hair and speaking stuff was a sin. It was more about how to conduct a worship gathering.
__________________
MadelynIris is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 02:20 PM   #234
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,667
Local Time: 03:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by MadelynIris
BonoVoxSupastar,

I don't think Paul was saying that the hair and speaking stuff was a sin. It was more about how to conduct a worship gathering.
Does it matter? You are still picking and choosing, same as Leviticus.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 02:29 PM   #235
Refugee
 
MadelynIris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Craggy Island
Posts: 1,504
Local Time: 04:42 AM
?

One is about sin, one is not. There is an implied severity no? One deserves condemnation, the other, well nothing.

?
__________________
MadelynIris is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 02:40 PM   #236
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,667
Local Time: 03:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by MadelynIris
?

One is about sin, one is not. There is an implied severity no? One deserves condemnation, the other, well nothing.

?
First of all man does not state what is sin and what is not. This is a letter written by man.

Second, if it was sin and deserves condemnation, who is it that should be doing the condemning?

Third, so are you saying that everything in the Bible that is not about sin can be ignored or thrown out?
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 02:53 PM   #237
Refugee
 
MadelynIris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Craggy Island
Posts: 1,504
Local Time: 04:42 AM
Quote:
First of all man does not state what is sin and what is not. This is a letter written by man.
I hear ya! We'll unfortunately that discounts all of Paul's writings....oops, I mean the whole Bible. So, no more using the Bible as reference on our beliefs. That's a tough one, your choice though.

Quote:
Second, if it was sin and deserves condemnation, who is it that should be doing the condemning?
It's pretty clear that God's law is good, and Jesus did not come to abolish it, but to fulfill it. Anyhoot, we threw out the Bible in #1.

Quote:
Third, so are you saying that everything in the Bible that is not about sin can be ignored or thrown out?
I guess I have to ask what you mean by everything? I guess what I'm saying is, one verse is about what seems to be a trivial matter, and the other specifically calling out God's wrath. It seems pretty clear from reading the whole books, but you have to look at the whole thing, verses before, and after. Not just pick out one verse here and there.
__________________
MadelynIris is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 04:16 PM   #238
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,667
Local Time: 03:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by MadelynIris


I hear ya! We'll unfortunately that discounts all of Paul's writings....oops, I mean the whole Bible. So, no more using the Bible as reference on our beliefs. That's a tough one, your choice though.
The whole Bible? The Bible is written by man, you're right, but there are numerous and consistent quotes from Jesus throughout the NT. This letter is just one account from one man. No commandment or teaching from Jesus is consistent with this letter. Paul is the only one in the NT that even speaks about it and like I said man does not define sin.


Quote:
Originally posted by MadelynIris

It's pretty clear that God's law is good, and Jesus did not come to abolish it, but to fulfill it. Anyhoot, we threw out the Bible in #1.
Nice way to avoid the question.


Quote:
Originally posted by MadelynIris

I guess I have to ask what you mean by everything? I guess what I'm saying is, one verse is about what seems to be a trivial matter, and the other specifically calling out God's wrath. It seems pretty clear from reading the whole books, but you have to look at the whole thing, verses before, and after. Not just pick out one verse here and there.
Oh I looked at the whole thing. But you aren't being consistent with how you are using the verses. You are saying it's OK to call something a sin by quoting one letter by Paul and using Leviticus which are both man's views and not backed up by anything Jesus teaches or God's law.

Both Leviticus and Paul's teachings have teachings that are not being followed by the Church these days. Either they found them to be outdated, not needed anymore, or something else. But either way you can't pull pieces out of them and use those pieces as "God's law" and not use the rest. So either be consistent or acknowledge the fact that these are views held by paticlar men and not that of God.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 05:05 PM   #239
Refugee
 
MadelynIris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Craggy Island
Posts: 1,504
Local Time: 04:42 AM
What do you think about this spoken by Jesus himself?

Quote:
(Mat 19:3-12 NIV) Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?" {4} "Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,' {5} and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'? {6} So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate." {7} "Why then," they asked, "did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?" {8} Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. {9} I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery." {10} The disciples said to him, "If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry." {11} Jesus replied, "Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. {12} For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it."
__________________
MadelynIris is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 05:16 PM   #240
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,667
Local Time: 03:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by MadelynIris
What do you think about this spoken by Jesus himself?

Sounds like more than half of the church should be condemned for adultery...
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline  
 

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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:42 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