Love the Christian, but not the Christianity.

[Ladewig]

It's not.
In the many churches I've visited or attended in my time, the issue of homosexuality comes up very rarely in sermons, in Bible studies, in devotional groups, in prayer groups. Homosexual fornication is a subset of sexual sin, and when it is dealt with, it's usually dealt with in that context.
The reason why it's being focused on so much in threads like this, is because there are currenty a lot of people who have a problem with Christian opposition to it.

I wish the Christians in the world were as consistent and logical as you portray them, but we need only look at the Southern Baptist Convention to see that they are not e.g. they called for a boycott of Disneyland and all Disney products because they thought Disney was too tolerant of homosexuals. It's not about sexual immorality, it really is about teh Gay.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Marriage is established early in Genesis; the assumption is that the sexual prohibitions surrounding it came with it.

The taking of hundreds of wives (vide Solomon) is established early on in the Bible. But was dropped later. Why? Where does God explain His change of mind?

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Now, you and I might disagree with the wisdom of a shotgun wedding, but it was probably what fit best in with these people's culture at this time.
There's a reason these rules weren't carried forward for us, though.

"probably"? So you don't actually know this then? What is the "reason these rules weren't carried forward for us"? Where does God tell us He's changed his mind?

 

[Paulhoff]

I find it a shame that people with good education would find the so-called god of the bible to be also the so-called god of the universe. Nothing in that book has shown me that that so-called god has a higher thinking ability than many people I know. Many times it has been shown in the bible, that it is very limited in its thinking and dealing with people and problems. In order to get that so-called god to work one has to throw out all higher levels of thinking and to reason in only limited terms, one must use no real logic at all.

Hearing many people defending its ways of punishment sounds like many children defending their parents for the beatings they have received from them, as in, "My (father/mother) must love me because they beat me so hard".

Paul

 

[Mirrorglass]

The funny thing is, the biblical passages most often cited as the reason for condemning homosexuality are in Leviticus right there with the dietary laws, such as not eating any animal that has a cloven hoof but doesn't chew cud (pigs), or the prohibition against mixing meat and dairy foods. I don't know of any Christian denomination that even follows the dietary laws (though I wouldn't be surprised if there is one somewhere), but for some reason, many Christians seem to think that the prohibition on homosexuality should be extended to non_Christians as well as Christians. AFAIK, the New Testament has little or nothing to say about homosexuality.

Actually, Avalon's response to this was at least internally consistent. Paul is quite bigoted in the New Testament, and condemns homosexuality on several occasions:

6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
1:29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
1:30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
1:31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

I haven't seen similar references to diet in the New Testament, though I admit I could have just missed some.

 

[Schrodinger's Cat]

I find it a shame that people with good education would find the so-called god of the bible to be also the so-called god of the universe. Nothing in that book has shown me that that so-called god has a higher thinking ability than many people I know. Many times it has been shown in the bible, that it is very limited in its thinking and dealing with people and problems. In order to get that so-called god to work one has to throw out all higher levels of thinking and to reason in only limited terms, one must use no real logic at all.

Hearing many people defending its ways of punishment sounds like many children defending their parents for the beatings they have received from them, as in, "My (father/mother) must love me because they beat me so hard".

Paul

when I WAS a Christian, I was never a Bible fundamentalist. I believed that the Bible was written by men and reflects the times they live in. I always just felt like I gave God way more credit than the Bible does. As you said, when I look at how God solved problems, taught lessons...it doesn't seem like the solutions a divine, wise, all knowing being would come up with, but rather what very simple, tribal, sexist, patriarchal societies would come up with. For instance, a woman who is found to NOT be a virgin on her wedding night is to be killed. This reflects that God A. does not care that ONLY women can be "tested" for virginity, not men. and that B. God is unaware that a woman's hymen can be broken in ways other than sex, that this is actually not even uncommon, so that these poor unfortunate women would have no way to prove their virginity.

Also, the Genesis story. Man and woman sin, and His response is to punish all women for all of eternity. But then, some women can escape this punishment, but not the poor oppressed ones who have no access to medical care.

If Genesis is to believed, and Avalon's interpretation of how God views pain meds....then the only conclusion I can reach is that God hates women, and poor women especially. And that he hates all women based on the actions of ONE woman ONE time. And that was a woman who was newly created, essentially a child, with no life experiences to draw from.

I just don't understand the appeal of worshiping such a being who is so unaware that he doesn't know basic female anatomy, and so sexist that he applies rules to women only.

 

[Ladewig]

The reason why it's being focused on so much in threads like this, is because there are currenty a lot of people who have a problem with Christian opposition to it. I didn't bring it up; I responded to questions about it. And if the questions had been about other sins, I would have responded to those instead.

If I may expand on a previous post. When a presidential candidate like Mike Huckabee compares homosexuality to incest, then, yes, a lot of people end up having a problem with Christian opposition to it. There are all sorts of Christians who consider homosexuality much worse than adultery and therefore single it out for condemnation.

 

[arthwollipot]

Right. That's the basic problem -- and it's not a contradiction or inconsistency in Christian understanding at all. It's just a difference in factual belief.
You believe that anything adults can do consensually that doesn't harm a third party cannot be wrong.
I believe that God has the right to make proper and improper uses for the world He created, and that acting against the will of God is wrong.
This is a basic difference in our understanding of the world, and of morality. And yours is entirely a matter of opinion -- there's nothing objective about it.
Calling God "evil" because morality stretches beyond physical harm and into categories of voluntary behavior is an arbitrary value judgment, and one that is unsupported by Christianity or the Bible.

This is why I am not and can not be a Christian. Your God is the one that is arbitrary, by your own admission. God's standards have nothing to do with good, nothing to do with harm minimisation - it's a purely arbitrary standard that He holds people to for no other reason than He can. At best, God is petty.

It comes down to this - if God told you to kill a child, would you do it? I wouldn't. Would you?

 

[Darth Rotor]

It comes down to this - if God told you to kill a child, would you do it? I wouldn't. Would you?

While I don't think God would do that (see my points on Covenants later) you can cite the case of Arbaham and show that it has been done at least once. Let's for the moment presume it isn't a one time deal.

You raise a good question. It presents a profound challenge: obedience juxtaposed with Jesus' command for self sacrifice.

John 13:34 (KJV)
A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

That's reasonably clear. One then discerns how Jesus loved his disciples ... well, he gave up all that he had for them, everthing on earth. Love as sacrifice, love as self sacrifice.

OK Art, I receive such an order. I don't know how I'd respond, but my gut feel is that I'd say "No, I won't. Do with me as you will. If I burn, so be it."

I am willing to risk damnation for disobedience, and thus sacrifice the joys of heaven for the sake of that child. That's consistent with obedience to Jesus' commandment. I can live with that, and yes, I may burn for it.

I don't think I will. I'll burn for much else before I'd burn for that. Why do I think that?

It is my understanding that the Covenants were sequential, and that the last Covenant between Man and God was Jesus' life and sacrifice. The third was the Covenant between God and Abraham, and his successors. If I guess wrong, burn I shall.

I can't give you a better answer than that.

DR

 

[bookitty]

While I don't think God would do that (see my points on Covenants later) you can cite the case of Arbaham and show that it has been done at least once. Let's for the moment presume it isn't a one time deal.

You raise a good question. It presents a profound challenge: obedience juxtaposed with Jesus' command for self sacrifice.

John 13:34 (KJV)
A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

That's reasonably clear. One then discerns how Jesus loved his disciples ... well, he gave up all that he had for them, everthing on earth. Love as sacrifice, love as self sacrifice.

OK Art, I receive such an order. I don't know how I'd respond, but my gut feel is that I'd say "No, I won't. Do with me as you will. If I burn, so be it."

I am willing to risk damnation for disobedience, and thus sacrifice the joys of heaven for the sake of that child. That's consistent with obedience to Jesus' commandment. I can live with that, and yes, I may burn for it.

I don't think I will. I'll burn for much else before I'd burn for that. Why do I think that?

It is my understanding that the Covenants were sequential, and that the last Covenant between Man and God was Jesus' life and sacrifice. The third was the Covenant between God and Abraham, and his successors. If I guess wrong, burn I shall.

I can't give you a better answer than that.

DR

This is the most Christian thing I've read on this thread. I mean that in the best possible way, as in following the teaching of Christ. Actually, I wish I had found people who discussed Christianity in this fashion when I lost my faith. It wouldn't have changed things (can't force faith) but I wouldn't have felt so...cheated.

 

[Darth Rotor]

This is the most Christian thing I've read on this thread. I mean that in the best possible way, as in following the teaching of Christ. Actually, I wish I had found people who discussed Christianity in this fashion when I lost my faith. It wouldn't have changed things (can't force faith) but I wouldn't have felt so...cheated.

Your servant, ma'am. By the way, you just made me blush.

As I said in a different thread, trying to be a good Christian is, for me at least, bloody difficult. It's a tough journey. It wasn't too long ago that I had register, internally, the challenge of an oft-used (overused), metaphor from scripture: the straight and narrow road.

Matthew 7:12-14:

7:12 Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.
7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
7:14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.​

My first exposure to the idea of "the straight and narrow" was a lyric sung by Dolittle in My Fair Lady:

Oh you can walk,
the straight and narrow
But with a little bit of luck
You'll run amok!

While that's good fun, running amok can bring a non trivial amount of bad luck with it.

DR

 

[154]

No. No. You misunderstand.

I interpret the Bible and you pervert the Holy Words of the Lord.

http://www.biblebrowser.com/matthew/7-1.htm

Please explain.

What do I "pervert"?

And you didn't address my point. Please do. Here it is again:

Keep reading. I challenge you to find and explain this verse's context.

Do you really think it logical that Jesus Christ came to instruct us not to discern right from wrong and good from evil?

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Please explain.

What do I "pervert"?

Your interpretation of the Bible and the so called "words of Jesus" is different to mine. I am right and you are wrong -- thus your interpretation is perverted. Are you unable to understand this?

And you didn't address my point. Please do. Here it is again:

You challenged me to find the rest of the quote and an explanation of what it meant (why the H the Ruler of the Universe and his bastard Son can't be more clear in the first place and instead need every word they "spoke" "explained" by humans is boggling to begin with). I provided a url that did both.

Jesus failed to follow his own instructions. Don't know why we should.

 

[Ladewig]

Please explain.

What do I "pervert"?

It is an attempt at humor - mocking those who claim to have the one true interpretation of holy scripture.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

It is an attempt at humor - mocking those who claim to have the one true interpretation of holy scripture.

An "an attempt at humor"? Sniff. I'm going to have to try harder.

 

[jwalker1960]

A very nice lesson. Too bad most Christians don't follow his teachings. If they did, we wouldn't have had all the wars between christians and christians, christians and muslims, witch hunts, burnings at the stake, racism, homophobia and dead abortion doctors, just to cite a few examples. The vast majority of criminals in prisons claim to be Christians. Christianity has obviously failed miserably as a moral movement, if anything, it has caused more divisions and hatred than any other single movement in history.

 

[Darth Rotor]

A very nice lesson. Too bad most Christians don't follow his teachings. If they did, we wouldn't have had all the wars between christians and christians, christians and muslims, witch hunts, burnings at the stake, racism, homophobia and dead abortion doctors, just to cite a few examples. The vast majority of criminals in prisons claim to be Christians. Christianity has obviously failed miserably as a moral movement, if anything, it has caused more divisions and hatred than any other single movement in history.

Your boilerplate disdain for Christianity is noted.

Nitpick: you are slightly wrong about this.

If they did, we wouldn't have had all the wars between christians and christians, christians and muslims,

Do you understand why?

DR

 

[jwalker1960]

Actually, it's my boilerplate disdain for all religion. I just focused on Christianity since that was what the original post was about.

There are a lot of reasons for wars, but the wars I had in mind were the wars in Europe between Protestants and Catholics, and the crusades of the Christians against the Muslims.

 

[dafydd]

No. This is one of the many areas where science is a blessing, if you don't try to use it as a hubristic excuse to curse God.

... and if you think the men didn't get cursed, you clearly haven't read the passage.



If we read the Bible we do. Have you?

I have,and some parts of it made very unpleasant reading.Lucky that your god does not exist,he comes across as a real turd in that collection of fables called the bible.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

I have,and some parts of it made very unpleasant reading.Lucky that your god does not exist,he comes across as a real turd in that collection of fables called the bible.

Why do you slander turds like that?