Was the Apostle Paul Gay????? - Page 7 - 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 12-09-2004, 10:57 AM   #91
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 09:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


This might hold more weight if Paul's writing was the only reference on the subject.


Playing the Devil's advocate here my friend. Your statement leads me to believe that you might say find Old Testament Law applicable in this case?

If Old Testament Law is what you are referring to, then again, I would ask you why aren't we applying it, but choosing bits and pieces?
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 12-09-2004, 11:00 AM   #92
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 06:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox


President Bush is taking male or female slaves and raping them? President Bush is making captives from Iraq have sex with him?

You truly feel that the society of Rome 2000 years ago is the moral equivalent of todays society here?

I am not trying to be flippant, I just figured that there was a major difference between the culture we live in and the culture of Rome at the time Paul was writing.
Slavery is essentially gone. But the idea of multiple sex partners of our leaders is not out of the question. Rape of "captives" happens in our prisons.

I think we would be hard pressed to suggest that we are morally superior to Rome 2000 years ago.
__________________

__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 12-09-2004, 11:04 AM   #93
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 07:14 AM
i don't think Abe Lincoln had sex w/another man.
i dont think Abe was Gay by any stretch of the imagination.

db9
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 12-09-2004, 11:09 AM   #94
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 09:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


Slavery is essentially gone. But the idea of multiple sex partners of our leaders is not out of the question. Rape of "captives" happens in our prisons.

I think we would be hard pressed to suggest that we are morally superior to Rome 2000 years ago.
There is in my mind a tremendously different comparison here. You are comparing prisons in 2000 to accepted behavior from the leaders of the society?

There is a difference between Calgula have the captives "rape" him, forcing them too, and what is going on in our prisons.

We are culturally superior.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 12-09-2004, 11:11 AM   #95
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,495
Local Time: 09:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nathan1977
Nowhere did I say that this is a gay disease. (Talk about a classic example of creating a rhetorical straw man.) However, I don't think it's homophobic to look at the facts and try to figure out what to do. Statistics don't lie. People engaging in homosexual activity (again, IN AMERICA, as I pointed out originally) are at a much higher health risk than the general population. To say that it's homophobic to look at the stats, is to stick ones' head in the sand.

If it is homophobic, then God help us all.



a few distinctions to be made.

diagnosis is different from infection. more people are diagnosed because testing is better, and more widespread, and more available. this doesn't mean that more people have been infected, just that more people are aware of infections.

secondly, you're conflating homosexual activity with irresponsible activity. irresponsible homosexual activity is one way to contract HIV, but so is irresponsible heterosexual activity as is irresponsible drug use (though we could say that drug use is, by definition, irresponsible). it's from these inferences you made that i extrapolted your diagnosis of HIV as a gay disease, and you alluded to again in your last paragraph.

finally, many African-American men who are infected with HIV got it from time spent in prison, and aren't homosexual. they were raped, presumably, and this is why it is spreading so rapidly amongst African-American women. i must asterix that statement by saying that it is a single theory of what's going on, and many, many articles are being written about Af-Am women and rising HIV, and it's exceedingly complex.

finally, no amount of irresponsible behavior warrents AIDS. yes, people know the risks (we think ... abstinence-only education certainly reduces knoweldge about protection ... but that was in another thread) but people are human, and stupid, and in the end it's a tragedy whenever anyone is infected no matter what the behavior was.

i am also very, very sorry for your friend and for your loss.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 12-09-2004, 11:16 AM   #96
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,495
Local Time: 09:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond
i don't think Abe Lincoln had sex w/another man.
i dont think Abe was Gay by any stretch of the imagination.

db9

While he may not have been gay, Lincoln did share a double bed with an attractive younger man, Joshua Fry Speed, for four years.

this is also the root of the name "Log Cabin Republicans" -- the very public gay Republican interest group.

and, as we've been saying, "homosexual" is a new word with a contemporary definition. it wasn't in the vernacular in 1860, nor was it in Biblical times.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 12-09-2004, 11:28 AM   #97
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 06:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
Playing the Devil's advocate here my friend. Your statement leads me to believe that you might say find Old Testament Law applicable in this case?

If Old Testament Law is what you are referring to, then again, I would ask you why aren't we applying it, but choosing bits and pieces?
I am suggesting that if a position is supported by both OT and NT passages, to me it carries more weight that the lone passage from either testament.

Now, I realize that there are counter arguments for all these passages, but each counter argument uses a different basis. I would give counter arguments more weight if they were consistently applied across all passages.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 12-09-2004, 11:53 AM   #98
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,430
Local Time: 02:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511

you're conflating homosexual activity with irresponsible activity. irresponsible homosexual activity is one way to contract HIV, but so is irresponsible heterosexual activity as is irresponsible drug use (though we could say that drug use is, by definition, irresponsible).
NPR recently had a story discussing the fact that public perception in America is that we've got AIDS beaten, what with drugs and medicines; hence, the spike in infections amongst gay men is also a result of a decrease in practicing safer sex. This is incredibly dangerous, especially in light of the article I posted -- in this day and age, unprotected sex is irresponsible, and it seems to be rising again amongst gay men...the "condom fatigue" you mentioned.

Quote:

finally, no amount of irresponsible behavior warrants AIDS. yes, people know the risks ... but people are human, and stupid, and in the end it's a tragedy whenever anyone is infected no matter what the behavior was.
On this we can certainly both agree. Grace, in the end, makes beauty out of ugly things -- and we are called to be agents of grace, no matter the irresponsible behavior. (But it still breaks my heart to see it.)

Quote:
[i]
i am also very, very sorry for your friend and for your loss.
Thanks for the kind thoughts. In the end, this is a human tragedy, and that is what matters most.
__________________
nathan1977 is offline  
Old 12-09-2004, 12:08 PM   #99
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,495
Local Time: 09:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nathan1977
NPR recently had a story discussing the fact that public perception in America is that we've got AIDS beaten, what with drugs and medicines; hence, the spike in infections amongst gay men is also a result of a decrease in practicing safer sex. This is incredibly dangerous, especially in light of the article I posted -- in this day and age, unprotected sex is irresponsible, and it seems to be rising again amongst gay men...the "condom fatigue" you mentioned.

this i totally agree with, though i think it's a perception a bit more common among heterosexuals than homosexuals, as most gay men know at least one HIV+ person (although, strangely, or maybe because i'm young, i am not aware of anyone i know being infected). though i think you'd be hard pressed to find any facts to support your assertion that condom use is declining faster among gay men than straight men (though i'd imagine a higher percentage of gay men use condoms than straight men do, since the most common hetero concern is pregnancy, and there's more ways to prevent that than just condoms).

but, yes, i can offer anecdotal evidence of gay men who are into "barebacking," as it is called, and i find it impossibly stupid. and tragic. but i also resist letting the activities of a few taint the social group that has done more to raise awareness of HIV and HIV prevention than any other.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 12-09-2004, 12:16 PM   #100
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,687
Local Time: 08:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by coemgen
Those of us who are Christians are coming from the perspective of the Bible, which clearly states homosexuality is a sin.
Do not speak for me. The issue is not clearly stated and if you'd like you can search the many threads in here where people debate that this is human doctrine that made it's way into the Bible like so many others. But I repeat, DO NOT SPEAK FOR ME!
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 12-09-2004, 12:17 PM   #101
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 09:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
I would give counter arguments more weight if they were consistently applied across all passages.
But, there are examples of things from the Old and the New Testament that people have decided does not apply.

I would agains say that women in both the Old and New Testament were not allowed positions of authority with in the religious communities. I think there is enough evidence of this to support the conclusion that we are in a state of sin as a Christian Community by not recognising this as sin.

I am curious....if we took the slavery argument....there is no evidence that slavery is opposite of the Old or the New Testament.


Are there other things that can be found in both that we as Christians do not believe today.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 12-09-2004, 12:20 PM   #102
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,687
Local Time: 08:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by coemgen
Dreadsox, i respect you tremendously, but to say the Bible is out of touch, therefore we should allow gay marriage is kind of a weak argument. Maybe a single word for homosexuality didn't exist at the time, but so what! It's obvious a concept or phrase or something did becuase it's in the Bible mutliple times, said differently. The phrase "A man should not lie with another man, it is an abomination." Is pretty freaking clear to me.
It also says lying in the same bed with your wife who's menstrating is abomination and eating shellfish is abomination. So if you're going to take it literally and not do the research to figure out this is human law then condemn everyone around you not just the homosexuals. You're going to have to add a lot more than just one ammendment...
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 12-09-2004, 12:33 PM   #103
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
U2@NYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Back in Buenos Aires
Posts: 4,281
Local Time: 09:14 AM
Paul is not gay.
__________________
U2@NYC is offline  
Old 12-09-2004, 12:35 PM   #104
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,687
Local Time: 08:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2@NYC
Paul is not gay.
Cool it's cleared up now, we can close the thread.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 12-09-2004, 12:45 PM   #105
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,495
Local Time: 09:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2@NYC
Paul is not gay.

acutally, Paul, my landlord, is gay.

or were you referring to another Paul? hard to tell.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
 

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 09:14 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