ty_ping
NewFoundLight
Elf Lord Chiewn
Updated: October 12, 2006
Okay ladies and germs, this thread is a rebirth of AcidSniper's "Being against gay marriage makes you a bad Christian" thread. This is also my supported opinion.
If you are Christian and opposing gay marriage, you are:
likely violating the Law of Agape (specifically, Matthew 22:39, Mark 12:31, Matthew 19:19, Romans 13:9), which is at the core of Yeshua's teachings.
thats dumb, thats like saying you can't correct a person who is sinning, I do believe the Bible also says it is better for open rebuke than hidden love proverbs 27:5, now if homosexuality is indeed a sin, then we're just trying to help, although I do feel that some....and I mean only some chriatians are homophobic, or they just don't like there beliefs on the subject challenged.
But first one must establish it as a sin (Which so far it has not been yet) and then one must also establish that the person is within the religion, because well first off you're quoting proverbs, if you look in context, there is no context. NASB says that the line connects to Prov 28:23 which makes more sense in that it's saying someone who is honest is better off then someone who flatters.
Quote:
can you actually prove that, and if that is the case, then I am being honest.
Now granted this is a two handed knife in that is it loving to tell someone who's fat, they're fat? Or even better, that their fatness is testament to their gluttony and that they should not only be helped in being corrected on the problem but be outlawed from fatty food as well.
in any regard, telling Homosexuals (with proof) that having sex with one another is a sin and trying to stop them are two different things, trying to legally prevent their happiness is moreso putting a stumbling block before them then simply informing them of something I'm sure they already are aware of.
Quote:
Yea, I kinda don't force people to not sin I advise them not to, so I don't know if your trying to say I am, because I'm not forcing anybody thats their choice and I can't really do anything about....well I can but I rather not be forcing it upon them.
And finally.
Who are you to point out their faults? You are not them, you do not know their struggles, you're not perfect, is their sin of being togeather somehow greater then your sin of not leaving your family to follow christ? that by your very existance in out consumeristic first world is causing the distuction of human lives somewhere else? You do not know what they have been through that they would decide this over God, You are nt homosexual to see their sin and say "Why yes I know your burden"
dust speck log and all that.
Quote:
thank you for judging me, you have failed to prove in your first responce that what I said is false instead you are making me out to look like a judgemental lunatic, let me tell you something kid, since you really don't know me either I know homosexual people I have two male friends I don't really hang out with them much but one seems to be in trouble with the whole homosexuality thing being a sin it is a great problem for him, because I've spoken with him about it many times, when I first saw Anael(or whatever his name is) I was happpy because hey this means that I can go tell my friend it's okay if you want to have those kinda relationships..but then I realized what if this person is wrong, so I basically did some reaserch and found his argument faulty. But hey since you think I'm such I homo hater then go ahead judge me such(without even knowing me).
Quote:
Quote:
judging your fellow man, which is warned against in the bible (Matthew 7:1-2, Luke 6:37).
again proverbs 27:5, and also everybody judges, I believe the judgement that is spoken of here is codemnation.
And wouldn't preventing them from marrying be condeming them and their sin?
Quote:
nope, just the sin, I don't know what you take me for but I don't force people...I just say, and they can make either decesion, if they feel condemned I didn't mean to,I mean christian can't stop people....well they can but I mean if it doesn't present any damage to someone else mentally or physically then hey don't try to stop them, but a word of advice should be given on the matter.
Quote:
Quote:
arguing against rights which would clearly benefit a people who are hardly different from the norm and who never offended you. Only recognizing heterosexual unions means that homosexuals will be hurt. I wouldn't want to have to marry someone I didn't love and wasn't attracted to in order to get those nifty things like tax writeoffs, health care, adoption rights, and (oh yeah) the dignity of being referred to as a married person, which carries great social meaning.
In a social sense this proves your point but we're talking Biblical here, so stop trying to appeal to the world and appeal Biblically, since the Bible is what christians hold as authoritive, not worldly views, if this is this case lets forget that Justice surpases mercy etc..and anybody who doesn't hold up to worldly judgement like sentencing a murderer to death without giving them a chance to repent if they want to repent that is.
Well if you look at the title the right to marrage is part of the social world so we are appealing to the christians who are trying to make their religion law, who justify their condement and outright hate of homosexuality based on a few skewed biblical verses.
Quote:
A few skewed verse, and also the title says being against gay marriage makes you a bad christian....I mean don't christians take the Bible over some worldly philosophy as authoritive? I mean the title seems to be addressing christians.
Quote:
Quote:
You may also be under the misconceptions that marriage is a purely Christian term, or that Christian marriage is a church affair. Both are false, as marriage is a legal term, and does not mean "Christian partnership" or any other such nonsense, and marriage in the biblical sense consists of two people getting to know one another in the biblical sense, and sticking around to spend the rest of their lives with one another afterward.
The first part of what you said maybe be right however, in a Biblical sense Matthew 19:4-6 speaks of only the union of a man and woman, and not of just anyone.
It doesn't talk about hermaphrodites, does that mean thy don't count either.
Quote:
what you stated doesn't make any sense...and also what are hemaphrodites?
Jesus wasnt talking about Marrage specific he was talking about Divorce, because the question directed to him was regarding divorce, if someone asks you a question are you going to answer the question and then go off on a tangent covering everything to do with that area?
Quote:
the section is mostly about divorce yes, because someone asked him about it, however why did he state what he did like that? I mean at the time the Jews knew about the greeks and their pratices so why didn't he go more indepth, also I notice how no where in the four main gospels does Jesus say it is otay to be a homosexual....as a matter of fact no where in the new testament.
Quote:
Quote:
There was not even a Greek or Hebrew word for homosexuality in biblical times, and just because it is used in popular mistranslations does not make it an actual part of the bible. Every word taken to mean "homosexuality" has either been twisted or misconstrued in a way that cannot reasonably be considered to be definitive.
Can you prove this?
Second post, Ananels thesis. They had words applying to lust and usually it was only applicable to a love of men but it was still generic enough it could be applied to women as well.
Quote:
Whats Ananels thesis again?
The word Homosexual itself didn't exist until what 17? 1800? I can't remember. Before it was sodomites but even then thats a shitty discription because in the biblical sense a sodomite was
a) a man or woman from Sodom
or
b) anyone who did not do p***s to v****a sex with man on top.
Quote:
Ah...what the heck? can you prove this? and p***s to v****a sex...what the chocolate muffins???
Quote:
Quote:
Additionally, before you start citing Leviticus, the Mosaic Law is moot according to Acts (the Council of Jerusalem), Galatians (Paul), and Collossians 2 (Paul). If these three references are in any way correct, the Old Law no longer applies, and certainly not to non-Jews. Were your ancestors enslaved in Egypt? Did they wander in the desert? Did they do dumb things with a golden idol? Because if not, there isn't even the beginning of a case for the continuity of Mosaic Law.
As I understand it Jesus is the fulfilment of the law and the prophets, and i'm pretty sure fufilment means to complete...at least I think so. Another thing to note, about Galatians Paul was talking about legalism, and that the law cannot bring salvation or freedom or justification, you are correct in this sense, and the fruit of the spirit does not say being against homosexuality, and neither does the works of the flesh say hey lets be for homosexuality, in that sense you may have soemthing there, however I remember that it says if you have love you will cover a multitude of sins 1 Peter 4:8, not that you will get ride of all of them...remember when in Ezekiel 16:49-50 when GOD was talking about why he destroyed sodom and gomorah, he stated later on that they did detestable things before of me. The detestable things might have been homosexuality, but as you see he does not state it in specific, which says to me; he's angrier at that they were prideful, and they did not help the poor and needy, which helping the poor and needy qualifies as the fruit of the spirit.
, plus since he said "Detestable before me" he could be referancing the story specific and thus be talking about the attempted Rape of his messengers.
Quote:
prove the bold please? about that messenger thing GOD said detestable things...plural not just one.
however the story specific as well in the entire context of the chapter does lay out the vast differance of how God wants us to treat people (See how Abraham treated God when he arrived as a stranger and how Lot and Lots people treated the Angelic strangers)
Quote:
Like your just going over one of the points I stated above..
Clearly everything bad that could be done was being done in that city. Saying "Well homosexuality *Could* have been on that list" is about as credible as saying "Well eating peanut butter COULD have been on that list!"
Quote:
thats a dumb logic, I don't believe any verse in the Bible or any christian has said eating peanut butter is sinful
one can simply assume everything God says not to do in levidicus, Sodom and Gomorah were doing.
Homosexuality (as homosxuality not homosexual sex) is not covered in Levidicus
Quote:
I'm sorry what? that kinda confused me.
Homosexual sex is only debatably so and applys only to the men, and not women.
Quote:
aahh, where'd you get that from? how did you come to this understanding.
250
200
200
