|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High-functioning Businesswoman
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 10:58 am
Ah, I see what you're saying now. Just to be sure that I'm clear on what you're saying and how you're interpreting the verses, you're saying that it was the context in which homosexuality was found that was being condemned, such as prostitution. Which is why I'm on the fence, because I like to look at the context in which the Bible speaks against homosexuality.
The verses that you mentioned from the New Testament that only allegedly talk about homosexuality, are those the ones where it's lumping homosexuals in with murderers and fornicators and thieves and liars and such?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 2:47 pm
Fushigi na Butterfly Ah, I see what you're saying now. Just to be sure that I'm clear on what you're saying and how you're interpreting the verses, you're saying that it was the context in which homosexuality was found that was being condemned, such as prostitution. Which is why I'm on the fence, because I like to look at the context in which the Bible speaks against homosexuality. I would not use the word "context," but otherwise yes. Using the word "context" does not make it clear homosexuality was not an issue in those verses, but that is just an issue of semantics. Ultimately, it is as though a man chewing bubblegum killed his wife. Do you say chewing bubblegum is a sin? Fushigi na Butterfly The verses that you mentioned from the New Testament that only allegedly talk about homosexuality, are those the ones where it's lumping homosexuals in with murderers and fornicators and thieves and liars and such? They would be the passages that are claimed to lump homosexuality with those groups. The actual words used are: Pornia, Arsenokoitas and Malakoi. None of these actually translate into homosexuality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High-functioning Businesswoman
|
Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 6:55 pm
Ah, okay. Thanks for clearing that up. The only one of those three words I know the meaning of is Pornia, which means prostitution. Clearly condemnable, no matter what one's sexual orientation is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 10:17 pm
De nada. If you have any questions, you are always welcome to ask.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High-functioning Businesswoman
|
Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 8:54 pm
I'm so glad to have you back in the guild. 4laugh
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 5:44 pm
zz1000zz Priestley Lethkhar Fushigi na Butterfly I'm pretty sure God is at least a little better than Hitler and has some better idea about how certain groups of people should be judged. You know, having created them and all. -shrug- I'm sure He does. But if He believes that homosexuality is a sin, and Priestley in turn believes that it is a sin because God says so, then Priestley is still guilty of judging homosexuals despite the fact that he got the idea from someone else. Jesus never said anything about homosexuality. I have demonstrated the Bible did not say homosexuality is a sin. I cannot think of anything in Jesus' standard that would support humans deciding what is sin rather than God. zz1000zz Did you not notice my post or are you willfully ignoring it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 6:51 pm
Lethkhar Fushigi na Butterfly Okay, let me amend what I said- you can't argue with God's standards without a consequence, either now or after you die. And Hitler didn't know anything- he believed. He didn't invent any standards- he merely violated ones that were already in place. And neither does Priestley. Nor you. Nor myself, for that matter. We don't "know" anything for sure, other than we think and we exist. And sure, maybe some invisible guy thinks that homosexuality is bad. But he could think it's good. Maybe only gay people go to heaven. Who knows? Nobody. So it is, indeed, up to discussion. There's no clear answer, so Priestley's condemnation of homosexual marriage is completely his own opinion and he should accept all responsibility for it, not blame it on a guy whom he chose to follow and whom, might I add, we're not even sure exists, much less agrees with Priestley. You can't do anything without a consequence.
I'd like to have a private word with you. Please PM me as soon as you're able.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 7:09 pm
Lethkhar Shizuka_Haruka133 zz1000zz Fushigi na Butterfly What I meant when I said that there was obviously some issue with homosexuality in some way was that on some level, God see homosexuality as bad. Now, whether that's in all situations or just some select ones is for us to figure out and understand. And hence, the debating. That's all I meant. 3nodding I see no basis for this. It is unclear if you used the word "see" as "sees" or "saw," but neither makes any sense to me. The only time homosexual acts were condemned the homosexuality was not the reason. The Old Testament condemnations were made in regards to temple prostitution. This would be a sinful act regardless of the genders in question. It just happened homosexual temple prostitution at the time was a common practice amongst pagans in the area. The only actual discussion of homosexuality in the New Testament did not condemn homosexuality. The people were condemned for turning away from God. This led them to numerous sinful acts, including homosexual lustful relations. However, lustful relations would have been sinful regardless of whether they were heterosexual or homosexual, and there is nothing in the passage to indicate the homosexuality itself displeased God. Fushigi na Butterfly But you make a very good argument. I'm just wondering why we no longer follow that taboo but still think bestiality is bad (and these two laws are mentioned one right after the other in the OT). There is no reason to be confused. The condemnation of bestiality in the Old Testament is no longer relevant. However, sexual relations outside of marriage are considered sinful. People cannot marry animals, so any sexual relations with animals are sinful.
I'ma gonna pull a Lethkar...
How do you know humans can't marry animals? ;D
Nah, I understand what you're saying (Fushigi) I just don't get what zz100zz (O.<) is saying.That wasn't a Lethkhar. Humans cannot marry animals because animals can't give consent.
Protip: She was being facetious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 7:16 pm
zz1000zz Shizuka_Haruka133 zz1000zz Fushigi na Butterfly What I meant when I said that there was obviously some issue with homosexuality in some way was that on some level, God see homosexuality as bad. Now, whether that's in all situations or just some select ones is for us to figure out and understand. And hence, the debating. That's all I meant. 3nodding I see no basis for this. It is unclear if you used the word "see" as "sees" or "saw," but neither makes any sense to me. The only time homosexual acts were condemned the homosexuality was not the reason. The Old Testament condemnations were made in regards to temple prostitution. This would be a sinful act regardless of the genders in question. It just happened homosexual temple prostitution at the time was a common practice amongst pagans in the area. The only actual discussion of homosexuality in the New Testament did not condemn homosexuality. The people were condemned for turning away from God. This led them to numerous sinful acts, including homosexual lustful relations. However, lustful relations would have been sinful regardless of whether they were heterosexual or homosexual, and there is nothing in the passage to indicate the homosexuality itself displeased God. Fushigi na Butterfly But you make a very good argument. I'm just wondering why we no longer follow that taboo but still think bestiality is bad (and these two laws are mentioned one right after the other in the OT). There is no reason to be confused. The condemnation of bestiality in the Old Testament is no longer relevant. However, sexual relations outside of marriage are considered sinful. People cannot marry animals, so any sexual relations with animals are sinful.
I'ma gonna pull a Lethkar...
How do you know humans can't marry animals? ;D
Nah, I understand what you're saying (Fushigi) I just don't get what zz100zz (O.<) is saying.Marriage is a committed relationship between two consenting individuals. An animal cannot consent, therefore an animal cannot marry. Priestley Willful ignorance is bad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 11:34 pm
Priestley Lethkhar Shizuka_Haruka133 zz1000zz Fushigi na Butterfly What I meant when I said that there was obviously some issue with homosexuality in some way was that on some level, God see homosexuality as bad. Now, whether that's in all situations or just some select ones is for us to figure out and understand. And hence, the debating. That's all I meant. 3nodding I see no basis for this. It is unclear if you used the word "see" as "sees" or "saw," but neither makes any sense to me. The only time homosexual acts were condemned the homosexuality was not the reason. The Old Testament condemnations were made in regards to temple prostitution. This would be a sinful act regardless of the genders in question. It just happened homosexual temple prostitution at the time was a common practice amongst pagans in the area. The only actual discussion of homosexuality in the New Testament did not condemn homosexuality. The people were condemned for turning away from God. This led them to numerous sinful acts, including homosexual lustful relations. However, lustful relations would have been sinful regardless of whether they were heterosexual or homosexual, and there is nothing in the passage to indicate the homosexuality itself displeased God. Fushigi na Butterfly But you make a very good argument. I'm just wondering why we no longer follow that taboo but still think bestiality is bad (and these two laws are mentioned one right after the other in the OT). There is no reason to be confused. The condemnation of bestiality in the Old Testament is no longer relevant. However, sexual relations outside of marriage are considered sinful. People cannot marry animals, so any sexual relations with animals are sinful.
I'ma gonna pull a Lethkar...
How do you know humans can't marry animals? ;D
Nah, I understand what you're saying (Fushigi) I just don't get what zz100zz (O.<) is saying.That wasn't a Lethkhar. Humans cannot marry animals because animals can't give consent. Only when I'm an atheist in a Christian Guild. wink You wouldn't recognize me elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 11:42 am
zz1000zz The actual words used are: Pornia, Arsenokoitas and Malakoi. None of these actually translate into homosexuality. Mmmm. See, there was a word for men who slept with and loved other men, and that wasn't the word that was used in the Bible. Another word replaced it. I do wonder why.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
