Macfistowannabe said:You do have to decide that yourself sometimes. I doubt he was gay, I'm not convinced at all.
Just not when the text refers to homosexuals?
Macfistowannabe said:You do have to decide that yourself sometimes. I doubt he was gay, I'm not convinced at all.
I don't see that as many first century men/men, women/women were attracted to each other as much as they are now. Just my opinion, though. I'm sure God works through gay people in a unique way, only God knows how for sure though. Don't get me wrong, I don't see men having some unintentional attraction towards another man as a sin, but the act of sodomy is mentioned and denounced numerous times throughout the Bible. Many like myself feel safe assuming that it's still a sin. I think it would be doggone sinful of me, a heterosexual, to experiment with another guy just because it's accepted.BonoVoxSupastar said:
Why? Do we assume he's straight until proven otherwise? Or does God not work through gay people? I'm just asking. The theory is nothing but that, a theory. I admit there's not enough there to say he is, but there is enough there to ask.
But there's a lot there to say the shit about homosexuality being an abomination may be wrong. Dread has done a great job showing us the true facts.
Macfistowannabe said:I don't see that as many first century men/men, women/women were attracted to each other as much as they are now.
Macfistowannabe said:
Don't get me wrong, I don't see men having some unintentional attraction towards another man as a sin, but the act of sodomy is mentioned and denounced numerous times throughout the Bible. Many like myself feel safe assuming that it's still a sin. I think it would be doggone sinful of me, a heterosexual, to experiment with another guy just because it's accepted.
I bet there were a few then too, I just don't know that there were as many.BonoVoxSupastar said:
The closet, it's a scary place. Fearing your life will do that to you. Trust me there were homosexuals then.
No, lesbianism isn't less of a sin. If people have some kind of attraction beyond their control, I don't see it as a sin. If they act on it in ways that the Bible denounces, I think it's a sin.BonoVoxSupastar said:Feel safe? Let me ask you this why the focus on men? In your post, and most others who see homosexuality as a sin, you focus on just men. Why is that? Is lesbianism less of a sin in your minds? This is what I don't get?
Macfistowannabe said:
Do you, as a heterosexual, think it's unsinful to experiment with the same sex, even if you're only attracted to the opposite sex?
Macfistowannabe said:I bet there were a few then too, I just don't know that there were as many.
No, lesbianism isn't less of a sin. If people have some kind of attraction beyond their control, I don't see it as a sin. If they act on it in ways that the Bible denounces, I think it's a sin.
Irvine511 said:
i'll repeat: your distinction between the two is wrong. sex is by definition sensual. do you not relate to men differently than you do to women? are there not gender differences that you respond to in different ways? your rather crazy references to "rape" as a non-sensual experience, well, rape isn't sex, last time i checked, rape is a crime. it doesn't qualify as sex because it's about violence and power and control. all non-sexy things. it denotes them experiences independent of sex.
what's this "i-know-you-are-but-what-am-i" language? the rest of it is devoid of any logic. and, it doesn't matter whether or not you relate to someone as a homosexual, Indian, or handicapped person. the fact is, they are much more aware of their "difference" than you, as the member of a majority, ever would be. have you any idea the privilege you have to talk about the whole "colorblind" "people are people" attitude? that's because you dont have to live with difference, those who are different are living in a very different reality.
you only think you don't judge. those you're judging know better.
men sleeping with men has been around since there were men; men living with, buildling relationships with, and professing to be the partner of one another is a very, very new thing, and has only enjoyed social notice and, sometimes, approval in the last 10 years. it's not the length of the relationship, but the public recongition of it as worthy is something very, very new.
how do you know what God says displeases him? does he phone you regularly? and notice how you refer to me as somethiing of a petulant child who better one day understand that "father [the bible/god] knows best." but, hey, you're onto something!
again, that direct line. tell me, do you have God's cell? and, oh, you're so humble. and righteous. and that smug sanctimony that drives anyone who doesn't ascribe to your convenient sense of propriety that drives anyon who's a little bit different nuts.
you and your husband can do things 10x more deviant than anything i did last night, and you'll still get 1049 tax breaks more than i will.
yes, you do know best. come, teach me. be God's conduit.
thacraic said:Sorry you can't see that, maybe it is too simplistic and literal for your liking.
lMaybe that is why I have such a diverse group of friends because I just love them for who they are not what they are.
I don't care what you do or who you do it with and I hate that government won't let you get tax breaks that pertain to an issue whichh should not be political or governmental in the first place. If you want me to change my view on the Bible, I can't do that. But again, as I said before, why do you even care?? If you want to live your life as you wish then do it! Who is stopping you?
Irvine511 said:
so, with that, i'm pretty much going to cease discussion with you on this thread with this post.
BonoVoxSupastar said:
Yes state it all you want. Just don't get holier than thou and tell me or anyone else they aren't following what's written in the Bible.
I honestly don't know to which degree gays can go. I think society should let them open up, just as anyone else who deals with a personal issue, so they can discuss their feelings. If they take the male/female relationship route, I know this sounds awfully weird, but they should definately open up to their partner about who they find attractive and who they don't. I don't see lesbian sex as any less of a sin than sodomy, I would still consider it to be in that category. Straight couples, yes it's a sin to practice sodomy. For the record I'm not posting this to change anyone's mind, viewpoint, whatever you call it. I'm just defining my biblical interpretation on a controversial issue.BonoVoxSupastar said:
Ok then according to this definiton. As you say "if people act on it in a way the Bible denounces" (which I'm assuming that's sodomy) then gay men who don't have intercourse are fine. Lesbians are in the clear and should be allowed to marry. But straight couples who engage in sodomy are an abomination as well? Am I right?
thacraic said:Accussing me of judging people? Look, stating what the Bible says on things (Yes BVS) is not judging.
thacraic said:
To me it seems like what you are driving at is this. I have a right to believe that the Bible is God's word. I have a right to think that people are wrong if they say they are following the Bible while they in turn make exceptions about it left and right and then justify these exceptions by saying it is also written by man.
Macfistowannabe said:Nothing personal Dreadsox, but is anyone really pro-divorce?
While I will admit that many people take their stance too far on the gay issues, we can tell that many divorces are caused by unfaithfulness, which Jesus described as an exception. There's plenty of talk in the Christian community about all these Hollywood bozos who divorce over "irreconcilable differences", and people who take their chances of getting married not because their relationship is strong, but because they consider divorce a practical option. This leads into all the sex before marriage talk, and I'm sure you've heard it all. You have to stand on your foundation - a strong relationship - before you take that to the next level.Dreadsox said:
Nothing personal, but, if the Word is the WORD why do we apply it inconsistently?
The churches were willing to ralley against homosexual marriage.
Why aren't they out protesting against divorce law?
We pick and choose. Jesus CLEARLY spoke about divorce, yet not so clearly on homosexuality.
The church is so willing to fight the fight against homosexuals on texts from the new testament that honestly appear to have been mistranslated.
Macfistowannabe said:While I will admit that many people take their stance too far on the gay issues, we can tell that many divorces are caused by unfaithfulness, which Jesus described as an exception. There's plenty of talk in the Christian community about all these Hollywood bozos who divorce over "irreconcilable differences", and people who take their chances of getting married not because their relationship is strong, but because they consider divorce a practical option. This leads into all the sex before marriage talk, and I'm sure you've heard it all. You have to stand on your foundation - a strong relationship - before you take that to the next level.
There is very little public pushing and shoving, and I haven't heard of a single "get married and get divorced because it's fun" special interest group. There are tons of special interest groups who approve/oppose the gay marriage issue, and both sides have jumped to stupid conclusions that are unfounded. We don't know that Jesus would approve of it or not, nor do we know whether men are attracted to men (and vice versa) by some "gay gene." In my opinion, a belief unproven is either a jump to conclusions, or a leap of faith.
It's all about who's going to stand against your beliefs, and who's going to stand for you. Nobody is protesting against divorce law, probably because nobody is protesting for it. Probably vice versa. I bet that if a "divorce for fun group" arised and got political power, there would be tons of Christians and churches that march against them. I know it probably doesn't sound right, but that's how society seems to work.
BonoVoxSupastar said:
Do you realize how high the divorce rate is? This has nothing to do with Hollywood or "divorce for fun". It's people picking and choosing for their own needs. People aren't asking for a ban on divorce because that would effect 50% of the church.
Dreadsox said:Thoughtfully here I sit.....
The two passages from the New Testament no longer condemn homosexual, but male prostitution, possible in the temple itself.
The Four Gospels, which chronical the teachers of Jesus are blank on the topic.
Sodom and Gommorah is not about homosexuality buyt about the customs involved in the treatment of a guest.
This leaves Leviticus.....with two references on calling for DEATH if one is a homosexual.
Hmmmm.....what else have we disreguarded from Leviticus that is Part of the Torah Law?
Of course I do, and it's ridiculously high. I've heard divorce being preached in church so much more than homosexuality. I was citing examples about how people get divorces for the wrong reasons. Banning divorce is not the answer, I'm not enforcing that in any way. I'm not sure what I said that made you think that I think divorce is rare.BonoVoxSupastar said:
Do you realize how high the divorce rate is? This has nothing to do with Hollywood or "divorce for fun". It's people picking and choosing for their own needs. People aren't asking for a ban on divorce because that would effect 50% of the church.
BonoVoxSupastar said:
Great job Dread, but people aren't going to be able to let go of their prejudices that easily.