Homosexuality - Sin....??!

[Asimov]

There is no logical debate here.

Only short-sighted blindness of a stern, one-sided position which only twists and conforms the view on the opposite shore...

Why do you peole call this a Christian debate section, when it is clearly a Christian hate section. Is this a lure of sorts for a way to impress and entertain each other in a glee and dance of totally blind apostacy and concreted ear canals?

 

Where is there debate when the Christian faith and God is only slammed and blasphemed purely because it doesn't meet one's desires and pleasure?

Where is the debate when one screams a reply to the truth presented?

 

Where is the very same fruit you seek from these Christians?

Would it be better if they sang the truth an immoral, insulting, blaspheous, and foul language (meaning cussing and bland, nasty remarks)?

 

God led the Jews OUT of slavery and into freedom!

He judged an entire nation on this!

 

hahaha. You are an ass. You come in here with your big holier than thou faith.

 

Judge me by my fruits!

 

You present no truth, you only present religious doctrine.

[Guest acorn]

If you accept the trinity then you're in a sticky situation.

 

Also, please explain Matthew 5:16-18.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Whats up Small man, Did you read a"little further down where Jesus says that unless your righteousness exceeds the scribes and the pharisees. Hummm, How did Jesus descibe the scibes and pharisees. Like I have always stood firm about, Most of everyones answers here are in the book that is in question.

[Asimov]

Whats up Small man, Did you read a"little further down where Jesus says that unless your righteousness exceeds the scribes and the pharisees. Hummm, How did Jesus descibe the scibes and pharisees. Like I have always stood firm about, Most of everyones answers here are in the book that is in question.

 

what are you talking about?

[Panther]

Evidence for homosexuality gene

This is just the first one I found.

 

I would say that a 99.5% chance of anything means it is pretty darn likely!  Even with a .05% chance of error, it is clear to me that it is genetic in the vast majority of people who have it.  How can something be a sin if someone doesn't have free will to choose it?  They are born differently.  I can't see how it can be made any clearer.

 

 

Yep!!! And WHY would "god" create something he despises? And then tell them that they are despicable and are going to burn in hell....

 

Thanks for posting that info! Apparently it was needed for the christians in this thread!

[Guest acorn]

   

8 If your hand or your foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life maimed or crippled than to have two hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire. 9 And if your eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell.

 

Ironic Amethyst. The bible does say to take extreme action in response to sin. Unfortunately it's pretty hard to cut off your brain, which is the source of most sin anyway, so in effect the bible says It's better to commit suicide than burn in hell.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

LLoyd, read the rest of the gospels. 1) Jesus was saying many different things in the gospels for that generation and all the following generations. Jesus said these things just as moses said things in the OT that were for that precept.2) Look in the book of Revelations and see what Jesus is wanting for His creations to do. Revelation 3.20

[Panther]

what are you talking about?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I was wondering too....

[Guest acorn]

First of all, I'm a grown woman and this is an open forum so don't come telling me how to speak.

 

Second of all, telling me that homosexuality is wrong because the bible says so is moot point with me since it also condones slavery.  And me being a black woman, you can say I'm rather sensitive to that kind of thing.  Not to mention I do not believe in the bible as the word of god and you might as well be quoting "Mein Kemf".

 

I do believe that everyone has the right to live their life as they choose as long as it's not hurting anyone and I have yet to see proof that being homosexual hurts anyone other than the crap they get from folks like you who want to run everyones life whether they like it or not. 

 

And what I posted is mild compared to the anger, wrath, and utter brutality God show in the bible repeatedly.  So why don't you demand the same respect from God you demand from human beings.  Oh wait!  You're too scared because you think god will throw you in hell in a second, right?  Just for disagreeing with him.

 

You asked me to show you good fruit.  You need to demand no less from religion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hello, I just wanted to point out that the Bible was written in a time that had slavery, and it was actually mostly discerned by what origin, national, etc you came from or what region, or finanical status, not color. The color slavery was, as Im sure you already know, first institued in the states as most know it in the history books because the different "color" people that the english men have never seen, and could not understand, were very easily distinguished if they tried to escape. Dont misinterpret this, I in no way have ever agreed with slavery, but it was a part of " history", and this should "historically" have no weight againist the Bible.

[euphgeek]

Hello, I just wanted to point out that the Bible was written in a time that had slavery, and it was actually mostly discerned by what origin, national, etc you came from or what region, or finanical status, not color. The color slavery was, as Im sure you already know, first institued in the states as most know it in the history books because the different "color" people that the english men have never seen, and could not understand, were very easily distinguished if they tried to escape. Dont misinterpret this, I in no way have ever agreed with slavery, but it was a part of " history", and this should "historically" have no weight againist the Bible.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Exactly. If things that were true during biblical times are no longer true today, how do you know God hasn't reconsidered his stance on homosexuality? Or on anything else, for that matter?

[Vixentrox]

Hello, I just wanted to point out that the Bible was written in a time that had slavery, and it was actually mostly discerned by what origin, national, etc you came from or what region, or finanical status, not color. The color slavery was, as Im sure you already know, first institued in the states as most know it in the history books because the different "color" people that the english men have never seen, and could not understand, were very easily distinguished if they tried to escape. Dont misinterpret this, I in no way have ever agreed with slavery, but it was a part of " history", and this should "historically" have no weight againist the Bible.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Oh...so whole-sale murder of villages was ok for gods follwers THEN, but not now. And what about ripping pregnant women open? Suppose it was different times then too. Is your god too fucking stupid to anticipate what the 21st Century was going to be like and write an appropriate book for it? You would think he'd be able to anticpate. Oh wait...I forgot...Jesus was supposed to already have gotten his slow ass here within a generation of his resurrection. Funny how that goal post keeps getting pushed back.

[I Broke Free]

Hello, I just wanted to point out that the Bible was written in a time that had slavery,

 

How convenient for the ruling class of the Jews to have a god that understands that economics takes priority over human compassion.

 

Their god never challenged slavery, a wonderful economic system for maintaining wealth

Their god never saw the good in any tribe who happened to have land the Jews “coveted.”

Their god recognized a strict class system that kept them in power.

 

It seems the only people god really challenges are the oppressed. But of course they will get their reward in heaven. How utterly convenient for the ruling class.

 

I cynic would almost suggest that the Word was written with “controlling the masses” in mind.

[Vixentrox]

Controlling the masses...No...say it isn't so!

[white_raven23]

I cynic would almost suggest that the Word was written with “controlling the masses” in mind.

 

You can't have even a village without the ruling class coming up with something for the lower classes to believe in to distract them from seeking the seats of power, working those fields, and generally knowing and keeping their place. Religion fits the bill nicely.

[Kuroikaze]

Hello, I just wanted to point out that the Bible was written in a time that had slavery, and it was actually mostly discerned by what origin, national, etc you came from or what region, or finanical status, not color. The color slavery was, as Im sure you already know, first institued in the states as most know it in the history books because the different "color" people that the english men have never seen, and could not understand, were very easily distinguished if they tried to escape. Dont misinterpret this, I in no way have ever agreed with slavery, but it was a part of " history", and this should "historically" have no weight againist the Bible.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hmm...i just happend on this message board and thought i would add my thoughts to this.

 

Let me ask you a question, and perhaps you will actually try to answer it. Do you believe that the bible is the inerrant word of God? If so how do you justify the idea that Slavery is wrong now even though the bible doesn't say so?

 

By saying that the bible being written in a time that had slavery excuses its failue to condem slavery is an admision that the bible is not inerrant. At least it seems so to me.

On top of that it seems to argue in favor of situational ethics, somthing christianity looks down on. At least they all did when i was a christian, perhaps thats changed in the last 3 years but i doubt it.

 

I would also like to see you try to explain why Chistians use leviticus chapter 18 to justify thier belief that homosexuality is wrong yet don't have a problem wearing clothes made of two types of material, Somthing which is forbiden in Le. 19:19 only a few paragraphs later.

And don't bother using the argument that the law about clothes is a cleanliness law and so isn't valid, while homosexuality is a morality law and therefore still valid, becaus that argument is exactly crap.

I've studies christian history extensively and that little piece of theology was thought up by chisitans after the fact to explain away apearent contradictions in the bible. There is no passage in the bible itself that ever makes that kind of disticton between OT laws.

[Vixentrox]

Welcome to the board Kuroikaze!

[Rachelness]

Seriously, what's all this shit about bridges?

[Asimov]

the man likes bridges!!

[Vixentrox]

Build a bridge outta her!

[SmallStone]

The color slavery was, as Im sure you already know, first institued in the states as most know it in the history books because the different "color" people that the english men have never seen, and could not understand, were very easily distinguished if they tried to escape.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No. I didn't know that already. Do you know why? Because, like 99% of the rest of the crap you post, this has -nothing- to do with reality.

 

History Lesson #1: Eastern Slave Trade

 

If you want more lessons, you're going to have to pay for them. Or better yet, drag yourself to a library and actually do some reading.

[Vixentrox]

Yeah...first instituted in the states? The Spainiards made slaves out of the native American populations long before the English colonies as well.

[zfunkman]

I believe there is something there about not mixing two types of fabric together also. I would not consider the Mosiac laws to be Christain laws.

 

IF the Jesus in the NT said to kill black people or gay people...I would wonder because it also says to love others as yourself.. Besides vengence isn't our business.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In the bible Jesus upholds the "Law of Moses". He never discards it.

[zfunkman]

Hello, I just wanted to point out that the Bible was written in a time that had slavery, and it was actually mostly discerned by what origin, national, etc you came from or what region, or finanical status, not color. The color slavery was, as Im sure you already know, first institued in the states as most know it in the history books because the different "color" people that the english men have never seen, and could not understand, were very easily distinguished if they tried to escape. Dont misinterpret this, I in no way have ever agreed with slavery, but it was a part of " history", and this should "historically" have no weight againist the Bible.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Slavery is and always has been one of the most EVIL institutions of humanity. Just because it is a part of History does not mean that it was ever OK. This initself dismisses the bible as the "word of god".