|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 6:29 am
... According to Christianity.
Okay, not too long ago I was in another gay marriage/rights thread. As always, I was for it. However, there was a Christian saying that homosexual lust is just as bad as heterosexual lust, unless you're married, seeing as lust is one of the Seven Deadly Sins. Now, I get this, but if all lust is bad, why do Leviticus and Romans even bother pointing out homosexual lust? And if all lust is bad unless you're married, why don't Christians allow gays to marry? It would save a lot of trouble.
NOTE: I know that not all Christians are like that. I'm saying that in general, even by Christian logic, many of them are completely irrational and illogical in their beliefs.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 8:06 am
Why? Because of the Old Testament (Leviticus 18:22, among a couple others) that (supposedly) point out that homosexuality is sinful and will land you in Satan's lap one day. Of course, if we listen to that particular verse in the Old Testament, why not the ones about stoning heretics (Deuteronomy, chapter 17, verses 2-7)? Some more questions you might ask: Quote: When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odour for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbours. They claim the odour is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them? I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her? I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15:19- 24. The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offence. Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighbouring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians? I have a neighbour who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself? Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here? Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die? I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves? My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? - Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14) (Cited from Old Testament Humor) When you go back to the Old Testament, it's kind of a pick-and-choose sort of thing. You follow what suits you and discard the rest.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 9:49 am
I understand that they do point it out, but my question is, why? Why bother pointing out homosexual lust if it clearly states that all lust is bad if you're unmarried? It's repetitive and redundant, at most. And the whole pick-and-choose thing is just retarded, and it's being untrue to any religion to do so. You either follow the whole thing through interpretation or not at all.
Seriously, though, awesome quotes there.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 5:18 pm
Hey, that's Christianity for 'ya. They kind of tend to turn the other cheek when any verse from the Old Testament applies to them directly, but when it applies to others? Hell yeah! Let's go stone 'em!
In other words, I really don't know... Try asking the Phelps family. ^_^
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 3:01 pm
But they'll stone me for being atheist/agnostic...
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 6:01 pm
Damn you and your logic... stare
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[ Chocoholics_Anonymous ]
|
Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 2:54 am
If you have seen Linaloki's thread about this, which I highly recommend you do, it explains it all. Leviticus is not supposed to be followed by Christians. I will find some more tomorrow, but somewhere in the New Testament, God brought down a sheet full of animals and the guy wouldn't eat because he didn't want to eat anything "unclean." God got offended at the guy and said "Don't call anything I make unclean." Sot that contradicts Leviticus where you can't eat shellfish or pork. Also some websites to check out: http://www.godhatesshrimp.comhttp://www.wouldjesusdiscriminate.com
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|