Homosexuality is a SIN!

[Gale_Force15]

Says in ROMANS 1:1-32
Homosexuality is a sin, among other things.

1Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God--

2the gospel he promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures

3regarding his Son, who as to his human nature was a descendant of David,

4and who through the Spirit[1] of holiness was declared with power to be the Son of God[2] by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.

5Through him and for his name's sake, we received grace and apostleship to call people from among all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith.

6And you also are among those who are called to belong to Jesus Christ.

7To all in Rome who are loved by God and called to be saints:
Grace and peace to you from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

Paul's Longing to Visit Rome

8First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for all of you, because your faith is being reported all over the world.

9God, whom I serve with my whole heart in preaching the gospel of his Son, is my witness how constantly I remember you

10in my prayers at all times; and I pray that now at last by God's will the way may be opened for me to come to you.

11I long to see you so that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to make you strong--

12that is, that you and I may be mutually encouraged by each other's faith.

13I do not want you to be unaware, brothers, that I planned many times to come to you (but have been prevented from doing so until now) in order that I might have a harvest among you, just as I have had among the other Gentiles.

14I am obligated both to Greeks and non-Greeks, both to the wise and the foolish.

15That is why I am so eager to preach the gospel also to you who are at Rome.

16I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile.

17For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last,[3] just as it is written: "The righteous will live by faith."[4]

God's Wrath Against Mankind

18The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness,

19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.

20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.

22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools

23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.

25They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator--who is forever praised. Amen.

26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones.

27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

28Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done.

29They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips,

30slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents;

31they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless.

32Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

[crawfish]

The sin is in our actions, not our compulsions.

[Gale_Force15]

Ah, so God couldn't make people gay then, because that is a sin, so then homosexuality is a choice.

[xexon]

This is a Christian viewpoint. Not all cultures share this belief. What sets us apart, is we have put this subject at the forefront of cultural discussion.

All segments of mankind have to deal with this issue. Most cultures will acknowlege, but still keep it in the shadows, out of the public eye.

The west has done much to test these waters. Thats why we must also accept the price that comes from believing in something that goes against the grain of most people in the global community.




x

[Gale_Force15]

Christianity is the #1 Religion in the world with 2.2 Billion Followers, followed by Islam, with 1.1 billion followers. So thereofore, this excerpt from the bible, believed by the most people in the world. Remember Truth is only what is accepted as true. So believed in being believed by most the world, homosexuality is a sin.

[Michele]

yes Adolph Hitler thought so too...that homosexuality is a sin that is!

[up2date]

I am certainly no theologian, so I will not even attempt to address the direct biblical issues. I will simply say, "so what." I don't mean to demean those who have strong beliefs in the bible. That is their business. To the millions who don't subscribe to a strict interpretation of the bible, homosexuality is not a sin. I would not demand others see things my way, so would should society as a whole be forced to view it as a sin because part of it does?

Where does it stop? Do we pick and choose which parts of the bible to codify? Just going by the verse above, what about adultery? What about gossips? What about insolent, arrogant and boastful behavior? And what about, are you ready for this, those who disobey their parents?

Believe these things if you want, but I'm not sure want you want others to do with it.

"Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.” That's pretty severe, no? Do you support that?
Ah, so God couldn't make people gay then, because that is a sin, so then homosexuality is a choice. Are you using a biblical verse and one person's reply to demonstrate that homosexuality is a choice?

[Gale_Force15]

yes Adolph Hitler thought so too!

What is this? So noone can have any idea that Hitler had because he is then bad? Well then, maybe you didn't know that Hitler had a wonderful family life. He treated is wife with respect and he believed that children were our future. He had many good qualities to go with his horrifyingly evil ones, so don't use that arguement.

[Michele]

you know this verse pulled from Romans is kind of racist anyway.

It is only speaking to gentiles.

[Gale_Force15]

I am certainly no theologian, so I will not even attempt to address the direct biblical issues. I will simply say, "so what." I don't mean to demean those who have strong beliefs in the bible. That is their business. To the millions who don't subscribe to a strict interpretation of the bible, homosexuality is not a sin. I would not demand others see things my way, so would should society as a whole be forced to view it as a sin because part of it does?

Where does it stop? Do we pick and choose which parts of the bible to codify? Just going by the verse above, what about adultery? What about gossips? What about insolent, arrogant and boastful behavior? And what about, are you ready for this, those who disobey their parents?

Believe these things if you want, but I'm not sure want you want others to do with it.

"Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.” That's pretty severe, no? Do you support that?
Are you using a biblical verse and one person's reply to demonstrate that homosexuality is a choice?

So I have done the last two once or twice, and I repented (yes, I am religious). Millions may not believe the bible, but billions do, and that means that the truth is christianity, by definiton if not by actual proof of god. What i am getting at in this post is that that stupid argument that god created people gay is incorrect, seeing as it is a sin.

[Michele]

What is this? So noone can have any idea that Hitler had because he is then bad? Well then, maybe you didn't know that Hitler had a wonderful family life. He treated is wife with respect and he believed that children were our future. He had many good qualities to go with his horrifyingly evil ones, so don't use that arguement.

okay you are starting to scare me...

how bout my argument that this bit you pulled from Romans is racist because it is exclusive to only Gentiles?

[Gale_Force15]

you know this verse pulled from Romans is kind of racist anyway.

It is only speaking to gentiles.

It is not racists, seeing as it is directed to lead the gentiles to being better people so that they can join god in heaven. The writer firmly believed that, and that he was helping their souls.

[Gale_Force15]

okay you are starting to scare me...

how bout my argument that this bit you pulled from Romans is racist because it is exclusive to only Gentiles?

Another thing; if i talk to only my race all day, does that make me racists? no.

[BFPierce]

Christianity is not a religion. Christianity is a group of various religions all of who have christ at their base. but one christian is not the same as the others. a lot of christian religions actually support gays and gay rights, as christ would surely have done. christ would also be mighty pissed at people who use bigotry in his name. That would include the author of this thread who presented a weak case for his argument.

By the way, Gale, in another thread you claimed that animals did not have souls and used as the basis of that article the idea that the bible never mentioned that they did, therefore they didn't. Now, it seems to me that the bible never mentioned a prohibition on gay marriage. am i to assume from that that there is none?

[Djj1973]

you know this verse pulled from Romans is kind of racist anyway.

It is only speaking to gentiles.

What does the Koran say about Homosexuality?

[Michele]

Another thing; if i talk to only my race all day, does that make me racists? no.

No I wouldn't define racism exactly like that... I just find it odd that in Romans, Jesus THE HEBREW all of a sudden is talking to ONLY GENTILES. Can you explain to me why?

And as a side I wonder where is thermo... because me thinks he needs to meet you.

ooohweee... ain't we got fun!

[mataj]

Well then, maybe you didn't know that Hitler had a wonderful family life.Hitler's family life lasted only a couple of hours. He married Eva Braun, his mistress of many years immediately before they commited suidice in his Berlin bunker in 1945. Short-lived, but wonderful, huh? They never had any children.
He treated is wife with respect and he believed that children were our future. http://dsc.discovery.com/anthology/unsolvedhistory/hitler/photogallery/photogallery_zoom1.html

Some future... :rolleyes:

[Djj1973]

Hitler's family life lasted only a couple of hours. He married Eva Braun, his mistress of many years immediately before they commited suidice in his Berlin bunker in 1945. Short-lived, but wonderful, huh?
Hitler had no children.

Yes but he was faithful during that time period! :D :lol:

[Gale_Force15]

Christianity is not a religion. Christianity is a group of various religions all of who have christ at their base. but one christian is not the same as the others. a lot of christian religions actually support gays and gay rights, as christ would surely have done. christ would also be mighty pissed at people who use bigotry in his name. That would include the author of this thread who presented a weak case for his argument.

By the way, Gale, in another thread you claimed that animals did not have souls and used as the basis of that article the idea that the bible never mentioned that they did, therefore they didn't. Now, it seems to me that the bible never mentioned a prohibition on gay marriage. am i to assume from that that there is none?

the bible is the officlially recognized book of christianity. tell me the names of the seperate branches that don't use it.

You'd think if you thought about it that if animals had souls mthe bible would tell us, like it tells us we do.

This chapter says that gay marriage is a Sin, so, do you deny that?

If god would be pissed at people who used bigotry in his name, then why is it said to shun evil, and people involved with it? that would be bigotry under the great democratic umbrella of bigotry, yes?

[Gale_Force15]

No I wouldn't define racism exactly like that... I just find it odd that in Romans, Jesus THE HEBREW all of a sudden is talking to ONLY GENTILES. Can you explain to me why?

And as a side I wonder where is thermo... because me thinks he needs to meet you.

ooohweee... ain't we got fun!

if he weren't telling gentiles, who would he tell, hmm?

[Michele]

What does the Koran say about Homosexuality?

I really don't care.... because at the moment. the real potent rabidness that I am concerned most with... is that emanating from the Christain right who has Jesus the Hebrew speaking exclusively to Gentiles about his HATE for Homosexuals. and you see I find this insulting because I happen to really like Jesus Christ and whatever this is going on here is ringing very anti-christ... if you catch my drift.

[Gale_Force15]

Hitler had no children.

makes me glad that I DIDN"T SAY HE DID!!!

[Gale_Force15]

I really don't care.... because at the moment. the real potent rabidness that I am concerned most with... is that emanating from the Christain right who has Jesus the Hebrew speaking exclusively to Gentiles about his HATE for Homosexuals. and you see I find this insulting because I happen to real like Jesus Christ and whatever this is going on here is ringing very anti-christ... if you catch my drift.

So you are saying that Jesus was racist?

[Djj1973]

I really don't care.... because at the moment. the real potent rabidness that I am concerned most with... is that emanating from the Christain right who has Jesus the Hebrew speaking exclusively to Gentiles about his HATE for Homosexuals. and you see I find this insulting because I happen to real like Jesus Christ and whatever this is going on here is ringing very anti-christ... if you catch my drift.

No I would like to know. What does it say and who does it say it to?

[Michele]

So you are saying that Jesus was racist?

no not quite! guess again!

[Michele]

No I would like to know. What does it say and who does it say it to?

then I would suggest you go find out... for when it comes to rabid fundamentalism and their literal translations with no question... it seems to me it is six of these and half dozen of the other.... because the end result is hate no matter which set of fundamentalists you happen to be dealing with.

[Djj1973]

OK here is what I found in 1 minute.

According to the Old Testament & the Koran, the people of Lot were destroyed because they engaged in homosexual behavior and were unrepentant and unaccepting of God's admonishment (Holy Bible, Genesis chapter 13, 14, 18, 19; Koran 7:80-84; 4:16 etc)

[Gale_Force15]

no not quite! guess again!

then explain what you said.

[Michele]

so what djj1973? you just basically made my point.

[mataj]

makes me glad that I DIDN"T SAY HE DID!!!I edited my previous post. Please, take a look, and make some research about "Hitler's children", and the future he planned for them, before you make a fool of yourself again.

[Djj1973]

so what djj1973? you just basically made my point.

Ahhh But my point is that you seemed to not show Islam in a similar light as you did Christianity.

[Michele]

if he weren't telling gentiles, who would he tell, hmm?

well I don't know you seem to be the biblical expert. you tell me who might Jesus the Jew also be including?

[Gale_Force15]

So now the 2 biggest religions in the world are opposed to it.

[Gale_Force15]

well I don't know you seem to be the biblical expert. you tell me who might Jesus the Jew also be including?

there was no-one else to teach. He was spreading his message.

[Michele]

Ahhh But my point is that you seemed to not show Islam in a similar light as you did Christianity.

ah well that might be because the fanatic aspects, on a par with this bit of christian fanaticism rearing up its head here in this thread, are not representative of the whole of Islam.

This anti-christian bunch of malarky being driven within this thread isn't representative of the whole of Christianity.... nor is the same hateful elements within the Talmud representative of the heart and soul of Torah practice.

However it is, whatever this bit of anti-Jew anti-Arab anti-Homosexual is, that me thinks just reinforces the most rabid forms of fundatmentalism within the fringe of both Judaism and Islam. For you can go on and on about what Jesus died for all you wish... in that passion play he died for the love of mankind and that means all of us... and Jesus he was a Jew.

someone can correct me if I got that wrong.

[Gale_Force15]

ah well that might be because the fanatic aspects, on a par with this bit of christian fanaticism rearing up its head here in this thread, are not representative of the whole of Islam.

This anti-christian bunch of malarky being driven within this thread isn't representative of the whole of Christianity.... nor is the same hateful elements within the Talmud representative of the heart and soul of Torah practice.

However it is, whatever this bit of anti-Jew anti-Arab anti-Homosexual is, that me thinks just reinforces the most rabid forms of fundatmentalism within the fringe of both Judaism and Islam. For you can go on and on about what Jesus died for all you wish... in that passion play he died for the love of mankind and that means all of us... and Jesus he was a Jew.

someone can correct me if I got that wrong.

So if we don't like killers because the bilbe says thou shalt not kill, we are bigots?

[Djj1973]

ah well that might be because the fanatic aspects, on a par with this bit of christian fanaticism rearing up its head here in this thread, are not representative of the whole of Islam.

This anti-christian bunch of malarky being driven within this thread isn't representative of the whole of Christianity.... nor is the same hateful elements within the Talmud representative of the heart and soul of Torah practice.

However it is, whatever this bit of anti-Jew anti-Arab anti-Homosexual is, that me thinks just reinforces the most rabid forms of fundatmentalism within the fringe of both Judaism and Islam. For you can go on and on about what Jesus died for all you wish... in that passion play he died for the love of mankind and that means all of us... and Jesus he was a Jew.

someone can correct me if I got that wrong.

Yes he died for our sins which are defined in the Bible.

[Michele]

there was no-one else to teach. He was spreading his message.


I think you need to take all of that heavy weight off you're head Gale-force... for you seem to have missed my main point completely. why in the world in Romans is this little teaching of Jesus only selectively being orated to gentiles?

In the verse you chose it says...

we received grace and apostleship to call people from among all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith

so why is it that through Jesus the Jew in romans his message is to be passed to only Gentiles?

[Michele]

Yes he died for our sins which are defined in the Bible.


whose sins would that be DJJ1973... only those of the gentiles?

[Gale_Force15]

I think you need to take all of that heavy weight off you're head Gale-force... for you seem to have missed my main point completely. why in the world in Romans is this little teaching of Jesus only selectively being orated to gentiles?

In the verse you chose it says...

we received grace and apostleship to call people from among all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith

so why is it that through Jesus the Jew in romans his message is to be passed to only Gentiles?

Do you even know what a gentile is?

[Gale_Force15]

whose sins would that be DJJ1973... only the gentiles?

Everyones.

[Djj1973]

whose sins would that be DJJ1973... only those of the gentiles?


No, everyone.

[Michele]

Do you even know what a gentile is?

oh really is that explained in the bible as well that gentiles are everyone? I don't think so. Please someone correct me if I am wrong.

[Gale_Force15]

oh really is that explained in the bible as well that gentiles are everyone? I don't think so. Please someone correct me if I am wrong.

A gentile is a non-jew. In this case, jesus was preaching to all the other religions love, and what is right and wrong.

[Michele]

No, everyone.


yes that is what I thought. So why in Romans is this hateful teaching about homosexuals only being orated to Gentiles... is it because they were only in a Gentile neighborhood at the time?

[Gale_Force15]

yes that is what I thought. So why in Romans is this hateful teaching about homosexuals only being orated to Gentiles... is it because they were only in a Gentile neighborhood at the time?

It was because the jews had these teachings, and Jesus was chosen to spread them. Or so i believe.

[Michele]

A gentile is a non-jew. In this case, jesus was preaching to all the other religions love, and what is right and wrong.

very good. no it seems to me in romans Jesus the Jew's teachings were being disseminated exclusive to non-Jews... now is it only me that finds this odd?

now he either was a man of peace and humanity, our dear Jesus Christ, or not... so why is this ugly message only being passed to Gentiles? Were they the biggest sinners of them all.... more homosexuals amongst the gentile community? Please I really don't understand were there no Jews in the neighborhood by than?

[cpwill]

why in the world in Romans is this little teaching of Jesus only selectively being orated to gentiles?

In the verse you chose it says...

we received grace and apostleship to call people from among all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith

so why is it that through Jesus the Jew in romans his message is to be passed to only Gentiles?

because only gentiles were in rome; the jews had been expelled by imperial decree.;)

however, this is hardly to say that paul's message was for the gentiles alone; typically whenever he came to a town he first went to the synagouge, another injunction against homosexuality is found in Corinthians; which was a mixed jew/gentile church.

[Djj1973]

very good. no it seems to me in romans Jesus the Jew's teachings were being disseminated exclusive to non-Jews... now it it only me that finds this odd?

now he either was a man of peace and humanity our dear Jesus Christ or not... so why is this message only being passed to Gentiles? Where they the biggest sinners of them all.... more homosexuals amongst the gentile community? Please I really don't understand were there no Jews in the neighborhood by than?

So your theroy that if you are a Jew Homosexuality is ok but not if you are Gentile?

Theres a real sales pitch. "Join the Jewish faith. You can lay down with your brother!" :lol:

[DeathMonkey]

OK, so what does this thread have to do with anything? We knew Christian dogma was homophobic, so this isnt anything new. This still doesnt give you the right to impugne other people's rights.
If you think being gay is a sin, don't be gay. Leave everyone else alone.

[Michele]

thank you Cpwill now paul? is he the apostle some considered to be an anti-Semite? And these gentiles before christianity what was their religion... what was the religion in rome before Christainity was embraced (constantine was the emperor embraced christianity correct)? By this time had all in rome converted and had all jews been dispossessed because aren't all the apostles also Jews, but for one.

[Gale_Force15]

So your theroy that if you are a Jew Homosexuality is ok but not if you are Gentile?

Theres a real sales pitch. "Join the Jewish faith. You can lay down with your brother!" :lol:

org.. did you really have to say that... I'm gonna have nightmares tonite. :(

[Michele]

So your theroy that if you are a Jew Homosexuality is ok but not if you are Gentile?

Theres a real sales pitch. "Join the Jewish faith. You can lay down with your brother!" :lol:

no that is not my theory.

[Michele]

OK, so what does this thread have to do with anything? We knew Christian dogma was homophobic, so this isnt anything new. This still doesnt give you the right to impugne other people's rights.
If you think being gay is a sin, don't be gay. Leave everyone else alone.

the homophobic nature of the christian dogma wasn't my issue DM... it was more the homophobic nature of the poster who seems to have some very nice things to say about Hitler and as a Christian.

[Gale_Force15]

the homophobic nature of the christian dogma wasn't my issue DM... it was more the homophobic nature of the poster who seems to have some very nice things to say about Hitler and as a Christian.

Ugh... Hitler had some good qualities, yes, but he was an idiot.

I am not homophobic, I simply am saying that Homosexuality is a sin.

[Fasdf]

Homosexuality is a SIN!
Cute.

I hope you don't somehow get consumed by contempt of the homosexuals getting married. You might go bananas and hurt yourself and then might actually have an argument that it is dangerous.

[Chelle]

If homosexuality is truly a sin, then isn't it none of our (humans) business?

I'm not saying it is, and I'm not saying it isn't. What I *am* saying is, "Who cares?"

When everyone dies irregardless of their beliefs or lack-thereof, don't they have to answer to a higher power (or not)? Whether that be God or _______ ?

Certainly isn't my place to decide what's a sin and what isn't.

Doesn't it boil down to each individual's faith?

[Michele]

Cute.

I hope you don't somehow get consumed by contempt of the homosexuals getting married. You might go bananas and hurt yourself and then might actually have an argument that it is dangerous.

interesting point considering the new ruling in Massachusetts.

[Michele]

Ugh... Hitler had some good qualities, yes, but he was an idiot.

I am not homophobic, I simply am saying that Homosexuality is a sin.

Oh yeah that's real different!

[Gale_Force15]

If homosexuality is truly a sin, then isn't it none of our (humans) business?

I'm not saying it is, and I'm not saying it isn't. What I *am* saying is, "Who cares?"

When everyone dies irregardless of their beliefs or lack-thereof, don't they have to answer to a higher power (or not)? Whether that be God or _______ ?

Certainly isn't my place to decide what's a sin and what isn't.

Doesn't it boil down to each individual's faith?

But the point of this is that we help these people see the error of their ways before they have to answer for them.

[Michele]

You know Gale Force,

You really have my curiosity going ... with all those good qualities you like about Hitler... what was it made him such an idiot as you say?

[crawfish]

No I wouldn't define racism exactly like that... I just find it odd that in Romans, Jesus THE HEBREW all of a sudden is talking to ONLY GENTILES. Can you explain to me why?

And as a side I wonder where is thermo... because me thinks he needs to meet you.

ooohweee... ain't we got fun!
Perhaps Paul was writing a letter to the christians in Rome, who happened to be all gentiles?

Michele...each of the epistles were written to a different church, dealing with different problems. There was little need to discuss homosexuality among the Jews, because the Jews believed as Paul did. If you hadn't heard, Roman society DID have a little issue with this. If you read all of Romans, by the way, you'll see that this isn't the only topic he dealt with.

Oh, and another Romans passage: "For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God". Too many Christians ignore this one. What it means - we're ALL sinners, we're all equally guilty. If any christian was to go out and kill sinners, he'd have to start with himself if he really believed the word.

I'm not sure how anyone can read all of Romans and come away that Paul was filled with hatred.

[crawfish]

You know Gale Force,

You really have my curiosity going ... with all those good qualities you like about Hitler... what was it made him such an idiot as you say?
Let's face it...if Hitler wouldn't have had positive qualities then it's doubtful that he would have received the following he did. That's the scary thing about evil...it's typically good packaged and redirected in some twisted, destructive way.

[Gale_Force15]

You know Gale Force,

You really have my curiosity going ... with all those good qualities you like about Hitler... what was it made him such an idiot as you say?

he was really a nice person, provided you weren't a jew. really, much like all tyranical leaders, he was nice, just not good.

As for an idiot, even you can guess this one. he murdered thousands of jews maybe? And othe that Blitkrieg his military strategy was basic.

[Gale_Force15]

Let's face it...if Hitler wouldn't have had positive qualities then it's doubtful that he would have received the following he did. That's the scary thing about evil...it's typically good packaged and redirected in some twisted, destructive way.

Funnily, at the time, the council that made him what he was thought that good quality was stupidity. They thought they could control him like a puppet, he had a very interesting life, if you ever get around to reading his Biography.

[Gale_Force15]

Oh, and another Romans passage: "For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God". Too many Christians ignore this one. What it means - we're ALL sinners, we're all equally guilty. If any christian was to go out and kill sinners, he'd have to start with himself if he really believed the word.

"let any man here without sin cast the first stone." i think that explains taht bit.

[Michele]

he was really a nice person, provided you weren't a jew. really, much like all tyranical leaders, he was nice, just not good.

As for an idiot, even you can guess this one. he murdered thousands of jews maybe? And othe that Blitkrieg his military strategy was basic.

you say "he murdered "thousands"of jews maybe?" Well. while I haven't read his biography and would hardly call Hitler nice, I do understand that rationale (which is kind of scary considering how down home and nice and Christian Bush is coming across), its that word idiot that's got me going. It strikes me as kind of an understatement

According to the historic record, the man is responsible for the systematically planned death of upward to 10 maybe 12 million people all together and he started first going after homosexuals you see. It wasn't only the Jews hitler wasn't "nice" to... he started with the homosexuals first.

[Gale_Force15]

you say "he murdered "thousands"of jews maybe?" Well. while I get the part about him being nice as far as people following him (which is kind of scary considering how down home and nice and Christian Bush is coming across), its that word idiot that's got me going. It strikes me as kind of an understate....

from record the man is responsible for the systematically planned death of upward to 10 maybe 12 million people all together and he started for going after homosexuals you see. It wasn't only the Jews hitler wasn't "nice" to... he started with the homosexuals first.

Okay, nice to know. Not that I care, seeing as homosexuals could just have been seen with women. geez, it's their choice to live in an unpopular fashion in a country on the brink of tyranny. Had i been a homosexual back then, I would have high-tailed it out under the guise of a hetero.

[Michele]

it's their choice to live in an unpopular fashion in a country on the brink of tyranny.

well that is true and thank God America has much more on the ball which is proven by this new law that just passed in Massachusettes allowing Gay Marriage finally! so while there may be some parallels to history pre-WWII at the moment that some of us seem to notice. This bit of legislation just passed in Massachusettes is hopeful. Don't you agree?

[Gale_Force15]

well that is true and thank God America has much more on the ball which is proven by this new law that just passed in Massachusettes allowing Gay Marriage finally! so while there may be some parallels to history pre-WWII at the moment that some of us seem to notice. This bit of legislation just passed in Massachusettes is hopeful. Don't you agree?

No, i think it is a sign of the degradation of society.

[Michele]

If you hadn't heard, Roman society DID have a little issue with this.

Yes Roman society did have a "little issue" with this. I guess that is why they didn't abandon it altogether but instead it just went underground... some of those within roman politico still partook of the greek baths... and of course the Catholic church seems to, if not foster homosexuality, they do have a way of harboring it or hiding it particularly the most perverted.

So much for Romans - eh?

[Michele]

No, i think it is a sign of the degradation of society.

oh you mean only now after all these centuries. Like at any given point in time there were no homosexuals. Tell me ... is all the denigrations of the world due to homosexuals? my my my and all this time I thought that was because of the Muslims.

[cpwill]

thank you Cpwill now paul? is he the apostle some considered to be an anti-Semite?

considering that he was jewish, specifically he was from the pharisaic strand of judaism and might even have been on the sanhedrin this is unlikely, furthermore, his writings in no way support such a claim.

if you are thinking of an anti-semetic early christian, you are liklely thinking of Marcion, who was excomunicated.

And these gentiles before christianity what was their religion... what was the religion in rome before Christainity was embraced

there was, and continued to be, many various forms of worship and religion in rome; it was the capitol of the known world as well as the largest city; it had a plethora of religions during the first century AD.

(constantine was the emperor embraced christianity correct)?

sort of, really he was just the one who stopped the persecutions; he wasn't actually "baptized" until he was on his deathbed; i've heard alot of historians claim it was actually his mother who was the trueblue christian.
however, that wasn't for another 3 centuries.
also, constantine wasn't in rome, but rather in Constantinople (instanbul, byzantine, etc.)

By this time had all in rome converted and had all jews been dispossessed because aren't all the apostles also Jews, but for one.

there were no apostles by this time, as they all died in the first century. however, to my knowledge, all of the apostles were jews, yes. furthermore, no, by this time all in rome had not converted, up until constantinople the church was still in hiding.

[Gale_Force15]

oh you mean only now after all these centuries. Like at any given point in time there were no homosexuals. Tell me ... is all the denigrations of the world due to homosexuals? my my my and all this time I thought that was because of the Muslims.

Marriage is a creation of religion to bind a man and woman for eternity, not a man and a man, or a woman and woman. the fact that because they complain we have to sacrifice tradition just shows how little character we have.

[cpwill]

oh you mean only now after all these centuries. Like at any given point in time there were no homosexuals.

that's correct, homosexuality has been present throughout history; which is one of the reasons why we can find it mentioned at so many different places in the bible.

Tell me ... is all the denigrations of the world due to homosexuals?

actually i'd say we have alot more to fear from the ever-growing number of single-parent homes, children born out of wedlock do much worse, statistically, in almost all forms of social interaction.

[Michele]

Thanks again CPW.

very interesting the bible from the historic perspective... I am aware, all but one of the apostles were Jewish some having converted to christianity. I just can't remember but recently there was a whole segment on one of the apostles, was it Peter and it is because of some of the things he wrote he has been considered anti-Semitic even though he had converted from Judaism to Christianity...

[Michele]

Marriage is a creation of religion to bind a man and woman for eternity,

Oh yes in our time can't you just feel that eternal bond between man and woman... it kind of brings tears to my eyes.


the fact that because they complain we have to sacrifice tradition just shows how little character we have.

oh so it is because of homosexuals that tradition has been sacrificed? That tradition being marriage I suppose this sacred eternal bond... that has faired so well in the 20th century. Is the high divorce rate because of homosexuals as well? You seem to know a lot about this.

[cpwill]

which apostle do you think was not jewish?

and no, peter was anything but anti-semitic.

[Michele]

i really don't know which one was gentile CPW, I probably remember that all the apostles were Jewish but one because of the special they just had on recently about one of the apostles ... unfortunately I had just caught the end of the segment I think it was a peter Jennings segment two hours... and it was very interesting what little I saw of it... because they had theological analysis from various judeo christian clerics and it is just fascinating really all the diversity in interpretation...

and there was at one point something this apostle wrote had him thought antiSemitic... I found this ... I do think it was Paul the classical Rabinical order perhaps thought an anti-Semite.

He was tossed out of synagogues and once was even stoned and left for dead."

http://www.cwi.org.uk/Heralds/Archives/Antisemitic.htm

this angst within Judeo Christianity is very interesting as well. there is enough angst between the two to mount a great argument for the Jews to collaborate with Islam as in some instances they might have more in common... but I am speaking intuitively or from snippets of information coming vaguely to mind.


but I have no clue who the one gentile apostle. was is Judas Escariot? Is that his name... I am just guessing.

[Michele]

you must tell me who was the gentile apostle... for now I am curious about that...

but I do think it was paul was considered the anti-semite, or at least it as been debated.

Is Paul the Father of Anti-Semitism?
Paul thinks of himself as a Jew, and never denigrates Jewishness. Rather, he invites Jews and Gentiles to create a new family.

http://www.beliefnet.com/story/142/story_14288_1.html

okay now who is the one gentile.

[Gale_Force15]

Oh yes in our time can't you just feel that eternal bond between man and woman... it kind of brings tears to my eyes.



oh so it is because of homosexuals that tradition has been sacrificed? That tradition being marriage I suppose this sacred eternal bond... that has faired so well in the 20th century. Is the high divorce rate because of homosexuals as well? You seem to know a lot about this.

Ah, so you're saying that since all marriages don't succeed we should just stop producing for humankind and start producing soley for ourselves?

[Michele]

Ah, so you're saying that since all marriages don't succeed we should just stop producing for humankind and start producing soley for ourselves?

no I am not saying that.... but what do homosexuals have to do with heterosexuals producing .... actually... I don't understanding what you are saying at all... what does any of this have to so with homosexuals being allowed to marry and what in the world has marriage to do with producing for mankind...

you mean you feel somehow that gay marriage renders hetero marriage null and void. I don't know what one has to do with the other.

[remrem]

Doesn't there have to be a god for it to be against god's will? Oops.

[remrem]

Don't be gay in the name of god, that's what I always say. It's funny that the people who hate gay people the most, hate Al Qaeda the most too.
Should fundamentalists like other fundamentalists?

Here's a fun link for everyone

http://www.poeticinjustice.net/webs/lost%20in%20legislation.htm

Remi

[Michele]

Don't be gay in the name of god, that's what I always say. It's funny that the people who hate gay people the most, hate Al Qaeda the most too.
Should fundamentalists like other fundamentalists?

Here's a fun link for everyone

http://www.poeticinjustice.net/webs/lost%20in%20legislation.htm

Remi



I bid you adieu you gay hating bastards
I saw your pitchforks already, so this time I’ll run faster.


:rofl:

okey dokey

[Slipped Mickey]

Ah, so God couldn't make people gay then, because that is a sin, so then homosexuality is a choice.
Where did "gay" come from? Either God created everything and God is everything or God is not. If homosexuality didn't come from God or isn't part of God then God is not all things and God is therefore not the only God.

Your religion may teach what you have stated Gale and you may believe it. My God teaches something different.

Where exactly is homosexuality on the biblical sin list? What number is it? What? No biblical sin list? No priority? A sin is a sin is a sin. You are telling us that homosexuality is sin and it is somehow given high priority on God's sin list. The fact is there is no list. I suppose you could use the 10Cs. But homosexuality isn't one of the commandments. So how is it that you know that it ranks higher than say gluttony on the sin list? Where is that written?

Once you begin selecting what parts of the bible to believe and which parts not to believe you run into problems. If you believe it all then you'll have to consider the original works, many of them left out of the current Christian bible.

When it comes down to it either everything is God or some things came from somewhere else and if that is so God is NOT omnipotent. :eek:

[JD3]

Says in ROMANS 1:1-32
Homosexuality is a sin, among other things.

1Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God--

2the gospel he promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures

3regarding his Son, who as to his human nature was a descendant of David,

4and who through the Spirit[1] of holiness was declared with power to be the Son of God[2] by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.

5Through him and for his name's sake, we received grace and apostleship to call people from among all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith.

6And you also are among those who are called to belong to Jesus Christ.

7To all in Rome who are loved by God and called to be saints:
Grace and peace to you from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

Paul's Longing to Visit Rome

8First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for all of you, because your faith is being reported all over the world.

9God, whom I serve with my whole heart in preaching the gospel of his Son, is my witness how constantly I remember you

10in my prayers at all times; and I pray that now at last by God's will the way may be opened for me to come to you.

11I long to see you so that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to make you strong--

12that is, that you and I may be mutually encouraged by each other's faith.

13I do not want you to be unaware, brothers, that I planned many times to come to you (but have been prevented from doing so until now) in order that I might have a harvest among you, just as I have had among the other Gentiles.

14I am obligated both to Greeks and non-Greeks, both to the wise and the foolish.

15That is why I am so eager to preach the gospel also to you who are at Rome.

16I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile.

17For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last,[3] just as it is written: "The righteous will live by faith."[4]

God's Wrath Against Mankind

18The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness,

19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.

20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.

22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools

23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.

25They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator--who is forever praised. Amen.

26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones.

27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

28Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done.

29They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips,

30slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents;

31they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless.

32Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.


This is just one of many websites and books that have studied the srcipture and dispute your claim.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibl.htm

[nyguy999]

Good post Joe.

I don't really understand the point of the post though. Gale Force believes that religion is a sin. That's nice and that's her choice.

I'm gay and and I don't believe it's a sin. That's my choice.

And even if it is a sin. So what? Gambling is a sin and that's legal. Sex before marriage is a sin and lots of people do that.

Gale Force seems to have an obsession about homosexuals. Why? If she doesn't like them, don't become one and don't hang out with them.

She should remember that this is a free country and not everyone has to believe the way she does.

[Michele]

This is just one of many websites and books that have studied the srcipture and dispute your claim.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibl.htm

this part of your link definitely deserves being pulled into the light of day:

Liberal Christian theologians tend to:

Interpret the Bible as having been written by authors who were intent on promoting their own religious and spiritual beliefs. The writers lived in a pre-scientific age, which treated slavery, genocide, mass murder, and the oppression of women as acceptable.

Since the scientific study of sexual orientation did not begin until circa 1950 CE, biblical authors had no awareness of the topic. When the Bible and science disagree, we have to give greater weight to the recent findings of human sexuality researchers.

Most rely heavily on the findings of human sexuality researchers to help them interpret biblical passages.

When theologians study the Bible for guidance on homosexuality, they generally look for applicable biblical themes, like those advocating justice, love, monogamy, caring, etc.

[Achilles]

To some it would be a sin and to others, not. As was said, who care's? But is gay sex natural? Yes. Correct? No.

Sexual correctness anyone? I jest.

[JD3]

Good post Joe.

I don't really understand the point of the post though. Gale Force believes that religion is a sin. That's nice and that's her choice.

I'm gay and and I don't believe it's a sin. That's my choice.

And even if it is a sin. So what? Gambling is a sin and that's legal. Sex before marriage is a sin and lots of people do that.

Gale Force seems to have an obsession about homosexuals. Why? If she doesn't like them, don't become one and don't hang out with them.

She should remember that this is a free country and not everyone has to believe the way she does.

I certainly agree with you. I have often said it was irrelevent. Like the things you mention, which are legal and sanctioned by the state in some cases, being frowned upon by a religion hasn't always led to banning.

If we are free, we are also free not to believe and to not be subject to the beliefs of others as long as we don't harm others.

But, being Catholic, and the first book I read on this was given to me by a priest, I think Christians should explore and seek the truth. Anyone with open eyes will see disagreement among believers and will note coherenacy problems within the book. There are interpretation problems and diversions in the teachings. To not study those things and keep an open mind I think betrarys the faith. But that is just a personal opinion. And faith is personal.

[Duo_Maxwell]

Something tells me I don't even need to bother getting into this one. It's quite clear to everyone except Gale_force15 that he's losing rather badly.

Get some good historical facts, some good arguments, and get away from the "religion says" and you might have a substainial argument. All you are saying is that religion said this therefore it must be true. That would work in a debate with 6th graders, but it won't work in a debate of educated citizens.

[DeathMonkey]

Here's the thing.
Whatever your religion teaches you, there are people of your religion who believe the opposite. When you jerks come up with a real reason for me to not want to get drunk at my friends weddings, let me know. And then I will refute it, like I have every time you open your mouths. "I aint homophobic, but homosexuality is a Sin"? How laughable is this? How did we get to this being acceptable if "political correctness" is so prevalent, but apparently common human compassion is not? Was there an aspect of 9-11 that made it OK to hate everyone but White straight people again? I just don't understand.

[cpwill]

i really don't know which one was gentile CPW, I probably remember that all the apostles were Jewish but one because of the special they just had on recently about one of the apostles ... unfortunately I had just caught the end of the segment I think it was a peter Jennings segment two hours... and it was very interesting what little I saw of it... because they had theological analysis from various judeo christian clerics and it is just fascinating really all the diversity in interpretation...

and there was at one point something this apostle wrote had him thought antiSemitic... I found this ... I do think it was Paul the classical Rabinical order perhaps thought an anti-Semite.

He was tossed out of synagogues and once was even stoned and left for dead."

http://www.cwi.org.uk/Heralds/Archives/Antisemitic.htm

this angst within Judeo Christianity is very interesting as well. there is enough angst between the two to mount a great argument for the Jews to collaborate with Islam as in some instances they might have more in common... but I am speaking intuitively or from snippets of information coming vaguely to mind.


but I have no clue who the one gentile apostle. was is Judas Escariot? Is that his name... I am just guessing.

i think you're thinking of Luke; who wrote both the gospel and Acts; and who was greek (a physician). however, luke was not an apostle.


as for the homosexuality part of this thread; i think we've had this discussion; the bible in both testaments is pretty clearly sure that homosexuality is an incorrect application of the gift of sexuality (that is, a sin).

[MikeD4o7]

as for the homosexuality part of this thread; i think we've had this discussion; the bible in both testaments is pretty clearly sure that homosexuality is an incorrect application of the gift of sexuality (that is, a sin).


Yet nobody can come up with a coherent or compelling explanation of why that is. I very strongly believe that society will eventually accept homosexuality... and it obviously will not be the death of christianity. It will just be one more aspect of the Bible that it's followers ignore or tell us "that's not the important part".

[cpwill]

why? very simple; as Jesus said "for this reason they were created man and woman; that man might leave his parents house and join to a woman and that they shall become one". God created sexuality to be used man-woman; he didn't create it to be used man-boy or man-man or woman-woman or man-mother or aunt-nephew or man-mother-in-law or man-stepmother or man-beast or woman-beast or any other number of ways which the bible lists (apparently people have always been pushing the boundaries when it came to sex); God created it to work one way, and to misuse it is to abuse it, so to speak.

and the churches that are accepting homosexuality, you may notice (such as the episcopalian church in the US) are dying. the ones that are growing are the conservative and evangelical ones.

[MikeD4o7]

why? very simple; as Jesus said "for this reason they were created man and woman; that man might leave his parents house and join to a woman and that they shall become one". God created sexuality to be used man-woman; he didn't create it to be used man-boy or man-man or woman-woman or man-mother or aunt-nephew or man-mother-in-law or man-stepmother or man-beast or woman-beast or any other number of ways which the bible lists (apparently people have always been pushing the boundaries when it came to sex); God created it to work one way, and to misuse it is to abuse it, so to speak.


But why? Considering the fact that we're in far more danger from over population instead of under population, what is harm in two men or two women being together? Let's question God's reason for this. Is it just for aesthetic reasons? If the sole reason for saying that it's wrong is that "It's not what God wants", and even God can't tell us why he doesn't want it... then you're really just giving in to a super-inflated might-makes-right version of morality.

and the churches that are accepting homosexuality, you may notice (such as the episcopalian church in the US) are dying. the ones that are growing are the conservative and evangelical ones.


Perhaps, but I think that christians who don't even go to church at all, but maintain that they're christians is becoming more and more of a popular trend. Homosexuality has been gradually gaining more and more acceptance in society... once the overwhelming majority of society accepts it... the churches will fall in line with it.

[Texsand]

why? very simple; as Jesus said "for this reason they were created man and woman; that man might leave his parents house and join to a woman and that they shall become one". God created sexuality to be used man-woman; he didn't create it to be used man-boy or man-man or woman-woman or man-mother or aunt-nephew or man-mother-in-law or man-stepmother or man-beast or woman-beast or any other number of ways which the bible lists (apparently people have always been pushing the boundaries when it came to sex); God created it to work one way, and to misuse it is to abuse it, so to speak.

and the churches that are accepting homosexuality, you may notice (such as the episcopalian church in the US) are dying. the ones that are growing are the conservative and evangelical ones.
Another text taken out of context in another feeble attempt to demonize homosexuals. The deal is that monotheism will eventually die out just as the pagan religions did. It's just the way time works.

[Michele]

i think you're thinking of Luke; who wrote both the gospel and Acts; and who was greek (a physician). however, luke was not an apostle.


No cpwill I am not thinking of Luke. There was special segment on TV with regard to I do believe it was Paul wherein there was discourse regarding how he was thought to be an anti-semite even though he was a christian jew. Of course it is debated, I can't say whether he was or was not. My guess is that he wasn't but the high rabbi's at the time thought him so. Apparently even here you are possessed by just your teaching. For me the bible is a vast and complex rubrics wherein the best part of the learing is NOT being taken in by one definitive interpretation but more in being atuned to them all. It is the literal interpretations that are the most problematic if you ask me... for the purposes of oppressing the people and at times that goes hand and hand with the Politics of any given time in history.

I was not thinking of Luke. The thread is here on this special I will see if I can find it.


as for the homosexuality part of this thread; i think we've had this discussion; the bible in both testaments is pretty clearly sure that homosexuality is an incorrect application of the gift of sexuality (that is, a sin).

Yes well than those are the parts of the bible I would be one to not take to heart to the degree that it means we get to persecute a whole group of people in our modern times. To that I would say **** the bible. Because in the hands of the righteous christains (or orthodox Jews or fundamental Islamists and I don't mean the terrorists, but just the very orthodox clerics) many of whom in essence are goading hate whilst wrapping it within peity it is nothing more or less than just more hate.

You believe what you have been taught. But don't pawn it off as if it is the ultimate and the definitive because while much of this was being pushed forward I would just love to know how many of those who were said to be disseminating God's word and the teachings of christ WERE HOMOSEXUALS or sexual perverts for that matter--look at the Vatican are they following God's word when they go behind closed doors to protect rapists and petaphils. Where in the bible does it give the vatican license to do that. Okay.

and is there a reason you are holding back which of the apostles was the gentile?

[The Big Bog]

Let's see ...

America can be a safe and tolerant place where citizens of ALL races, sexes, ages, religious beliefs, national origins, and sexual orientations are treated respectfully and equally (as presently guaranteed by our Constitution's equal protection clause).

OR

America can be like the Middle East -- a place where religion IS the law.

Hmmmm, what kind of culture do YOU choose? :thinking:

[Seth928]

Just wanna say that the next thing you guys should lobby against is Red Lobster because according to the same book in the bible eating anything from the ocean without fins and gill is "destestable". This is one of the biggest reasons I have turned away from religion. You can't pick and choose what you believe its either all or nothing so until the massive christian population of this nation rallies against Red Lobster I can not take their fight against homosexuality seriously.

[cpwill]

No cpwill I am not thinking of Luke. There was special segment on TV with regard to I do believe it was Paul wherein there was discourse regarding how he was thought to be an anti-semite even though he was a christian jew. Of course it is debated, I can't say whether he was or was not. My guess is that he wasn't but the high rabbi's at the time thought him so. Apparently even here you are possessed by just your teaching. For me the bible is a vast and complex rubrics wherein the best part of the learing is NOT being taken in by one definitive interpretation but more in being atuned to them all. It is the literal interpretations that are the most problematic if you ask me... for the purposes of oppressing the people and at times that goes hand and hand with the Politics of any given time in history.

I was not thinking of Luke. The thread is here on this special I will see if I can find it.

do so, i'm highly interested in seeing what evidence these people have come up with against the man who declared there was no difference between jew and gentile.

Yes well than those are the parts of the bible I would be one to not take to heart to the degree that it means we get to persecute a whole group of people in our modern times.

:confused: heck, Jesus doesn't want us to persecute them, he just doesn't think that homosexuality is God's Will and he doesn't want us to emulate them. if possible, he'd love for us to reach them, and show them that we love them just as he does.

You believe what you have been taught.

i believe what i have figured out for myself and what i have been shown and what i have learned from academic study. you seem to be positive in the truth of something you saw on a tv show once, the name of which you cannot recall, but it must be true because it was on tv.:rolleyes:

But don't pawn it off as if it is the ultimate and the definitive because while much of this was being pushed forward I would just love to know how many of those who were said to be disseminating God's word and the teachings of christ WERE HOMOSEXUALS or sexual perverts for that matter--

probably some. some were also murderers, liars, thieves, adulterers, etc.

look at the Vatican are they following God's word when they go behind closed doors to protect rapists and petaphils.

nope.

Where in the bible does it give the vatican license to do that.

it doesn't, in fact, this is the sort of behavior that typically made Jesus madder than anything else. if there was one thing garunteed to piss him off it was corruption amongst religious figures.

and is there a reason you are holding back which of the apostles was the gentile?

because as far as i know, none of them were. some of the gospel writers may have been gentiles (luke was the example i gave you, which you rejected), but all of the apostles were jews.

[Michele]

i believe what i have figured out for myself and what i have been shown and what i have learned from academic study. you seem to be positive in the truth of something you saw on a tv show once, the name of which you cannot recall, but it must be true because it was on tv.:rolleyes:




Oh okay, I misunderstood. You were saying luke was the gentile. I misunderstood. No I don't reject that. It is safe to believe that is true what you say about luke.

I am not saying that whomever it was the segment by Peter Jennings was talking about (which I think it was paul but I have to double check) is for sure an anti-semite, I only point out there is an ongoing discourse between various Jewish theologians and Christian theologians that he was an anti-semite. I myself have no vote. I am just pointing out the disagreement between the two theologies is all.

I only felt reinforced that it was Paul because then I happened to find the article about him being thrown out of synagogues. Let me see if I can find the thread on this special here so at least I know which apostle we are talking about. The special may have been on someone else.

Whoever the apostle was thought to be the anti-semite, the point is I am not saying that is definitely true.... I only point out that there are Jewish theologians that seem to believe he was.... I myself have no vote in the matter... but there is an argument going that states he was... on the Christain side of the debate they don't feel he was.

[Michele]

Cpwill,

here was the special Peter Jennings aired. It was paul. The basis of the accusation that he was anti-Semitic and fueled anti-Semitism is made with regard to some of the angry words Paul used. Boy do I have a memory or what? Unfortunately I didn't catch the whole three hours because what I did happen to catch was highly interesting.

The special entitled: "Jesus and Paul: The Word and the Witness." really focused on what was the message of Jesus... various teaching then was discussed by a number of theologians including this issue with regard to Homosexuality in which some of the Christian theologians do not believe Jesus meant for homosexuals to be persecuted or necessarily converted because Jesus's message all in all was about love and acceptance between humanity. So even in this regard there is disparity amongst the Christain theologians. Apparently it was aired on more than one night so I did happen to catch more than that 20 minutes as I do remember having caught the segment wherein homosexuality was discussed as well. I would love if they reaired this special.

As to the bit about Paul:

Partly because of that decision, Paul feuded with some of the people who knew Jesus when he was alive. The film showed how some of the angry words Paul used during this debate became the fuel for anti-Semitism centuries later.

here is another snip as to why he chose the Gospels of Paul:

"Paul is a wonderful story, just a wonderfully interesting story, and a story very relevant to today," Jennings said. "So much of what we're debating in the country today – marriage, sex, religiosity, the role of women – was precisely what was going on in Paul's day."

here is an article on the special:

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20040405/news_mz1c5jenning.html

[Michele]

continuing from above post to cpwill. it is just worth pulling out more of these words from that article I placed in the post above. I find bible study most interesting with regard to where the disagreements lie and that there exists disagreement is percisely why I reject any one interpretations insistance that it is the true word of God, specifically because that word is left to the interpretation of mortal men influenced by the politics of their time. That is why I feel the bible is most inspiring as an interactive tool wherein we don't necessarily fixate upon a definitive interpretation but instead regularly question all interpretations in an ongoing way.... If one does that than they escape any one indoctrination. But of course that is me.

snip

Jesus' message of compassion to the poor was even more radical then, and was likely to threaten a brutal Roman regime that didn't hesitate to snuff out threats. The documentary does not explicitly lay full blame for his death on either Roman or Jewish leaders.

snip

"If you just accepted only the Bible, you would not be doing a reporter's job, which is why you have to look at Roman history and Jewish history that was outside of the Gospels," Jennings said.

more...

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20040405/news_mz1c5jenning.html

I agree, if you just accept only one interpetation of the Bible while factoring out the various political corruptions intrinsic within the Bible (or during the time in history these Apostles lived), you do a disservice to Bible practice. The polticial corruptions is in many ways what tarnishes any truth... even the word of God or the message of Jesus Christ.... which is what I believe many of the more frenetic Christian theologians are guilt of having done.

Some of our more famous Christian Theologians have specific agenda's and political aims, which they place ahead of an honest interpretation of the word. IMO, corruptions of the political sort can play too large of a role within interpretations, as they have done throughout the course of both biblical and western civilization.

This is regularly demonstrated in the hack our mainstream media makes of truth even whence the coverage is in time with history in the making.... think of the bastardization that occurred between the time of Christ and its retrospective recounting of his word centuries later.... and still there exists disparity even now.

[Michele]

once more I pull a comment from the article on the peter jennings special:

Jesus' message of compassion to the poor was even more radical then, and was likely to threaten a brutal Roman regime that didn't hesitate to snuff out threats. The documentary does not explicitly lay full blame for his death on either Roman or Jewish leaders.

END SNIP

As to Jesus's message of compassion to the poor-- to the meek...(because now I am on one of my pathetical rolls), I firmly believe that same message would have current authorities snuffing Jesus out today as well --- for all our talk of the message of Jesus Christ.

I find it regularly disheartening that the message some of our Christians fixate upon with potent vitriolic ferver, negates Jesus's main message: Compasion for the poor and the meek. Instead we have people embracing the more hateful recriminations toward various subcultures wherein hate is fomented without any mind paid to Jesus's message of compassion for the disenfranchised and the down trodden whom mainstream society seems to like to kick when they are down.

For me, Jesus's message of compassion is the crux of his overall message which superscedes all this homosexuals are sinners crap that seems to take more of the center of the stage than the compassion that fed Jesus's life's purpose: Compassion not for the powerful but for the meek.

[Michele]

something is screwy I have to kick the thread to be sure my new post posted.

[Michele]

this is so funny.... my mother sent me a belated birthday gift I guess it is and it is so funny... because of all things to send me... she sent me the new international version of THE BIBLE...

that is what I call synchronicity.... how funny. I just this minute opened it up... the package came yesterday.

[Ronnieraygun]

that is what I call synchronicity.... how funny. I just this minute opened it up... the package came yesterday.
Or perhaps serindipidous??:D

[Michele]

wow what is even more interesting is at the very back of the book there are two maps... one is the map of the Land of the twelve tribes. There is no Jordan but oddly there is the Jordan River, though there is Ammon. There is Judah --- wherein is located Hebron at the fringe of Judah is Jerusalem to the north and Bethlehem to the south on the coast is gaza. There is Asher and napthtali, and manasseh within which is samaria... but no nazareth. There is no mention of Galilee. There is Golan and Damascus but no Syria... No Palestine that is not here on this map not anywhere.


Then we have the map some centuries later same geography which outlines Jesus's Ministry. Still no Palestine... but we have Judea now wherein is located both bethlehem and Jerusalem...and now instead of Manasseh we have Samaria not as a city but as a replacement for Manasseh. Above Galilee is now Pheonicia where Asher and Napthtali once was on the map of the twelve tribes. there is mention of a Jordan but only as this one little town with a question mark next to the name and still there is no Palestine.

Well now I know where the "there is no Palestine argument" comes from... these ancient maps, which is funny because at the time there was no Syria or Jordan as we know it now either on these maps and nobody argues that Jordan and Syria don't exist.

oh man... how fascinating really.

[Michele]

Or perhaps serindipidous??:D


actually you are more correct it is more serindipidous. In the meantime I love this gift it is the best gift... now I will read it before bedtime... I hope it doesn't give me any bad dreams. :p

[jamesrage]

Christianity is not a religion. Christianity is a group of various religions all of who have christ at their base. but one christian is not the same as the others. a lot of christian religions actually support gays and gay rights, as christ would surely have done. christ would also be mighty pissed at people who use bigotry in his name. That would include the author of this thread who presented a weak case for his argument.



You are correct on this statement,we have wannabe christians who basicly in a sense remove what they do not like about the bible and follow what they want.We also have real christians who believe that the whole bible was ordained by God and is holy and follow the scriptures.

It seems today that many people just might as well be literally marking out or cutting out what they do not want to follow in the bible.Then say" well that doesn't apply to today's standards".Then they lead themselve to be in complete denial that they have sinned in the first place.I believe there is a difference between knowing that you are sinning and sinning and be in complete denial the the same time.We must confess and ask for forgiveness for our sins before we are forgiven.If we fool our selves into thinking that homosexuality and other sins are not sin then we will be denied forgivness since we did not acknowledge those sins and did not ask forgivness for doing those sins.




By the way, Gale, in another thread you claimed that animals did not have souls and used as the basis of that article the idea that the bible never mentioned that they did, therefore they didn't. Now, it seems to me that the bible never mentioned a prohibition on gay marriage. am i to assume from that that there is none?.

That is the most ridiculus statement I have ever heard,that is more rediculus than my spelling.Do you know why the bible does not mention a prohibition on gay marriage?You must be retarded if you do not know.The act of homosexuality is a sin,a obimination to God ,so why would a prohibition on gay marriage be mentioned and or needed if homosexuality is a sin?

[Triple_R]

Homosexuality is, indeed, a sin.

It's important that the sinful nature of homosexuality, or rather homosexual intercourse, is made known due to how society is currently making great attempts to popularize homosexuality. As always, though, it is essential to seperate the sinner from the sin.

[Michele]

unbelievable.... so many sins to address

sex before marriage it too a sin... is there anything in the wind for plans to mount a crusade against that as well?

talk about a subject that puts one to :sleep:

[DeathMonkey]

Homosexuality is, indeed, a sin.

It's important that the sinful nature of homosexuality, or rather homosexual intercourse, is made known due to how society is currently making great attempts to popularize homosexuality. As always, though, it is essential to seperate the sinner from the sin.

SO, what about these? The Seven Deadly Sins:

Pride is excessive belief in one's own abilities, that interferes with the individual's recognition of the grace of God. It has been called the sin from which all others arise. Pride is also known as Vanity.
Envy is the desire for others' traits, status, abilities, or situation.
Gluttony is an inordinate desire to consume more than that which one requires.
Lust is an inordinate craving for the pleasures of the body.
Anger is manifested in the individual who spurns love and opts instead for fury. It is also known as Wrath.
Greed is the desire for material wealth or gain, ignoring the realm of the spiritual. It is also called Avarice or Covetousness.
Sloth is the avoidance of physical or spiritual work.

"I dun see that there Gay stuff listed."

Maybe some of you should focus on these instead:


Contrary, Heavenly, and Cardinal Virtues

In this world of iniquity, they are a few gleams of hope in the mire of our shameful indulgences. Various formulations of Virtue have been proposed over the ages.

The Cardinal Virtues:
prudence, temperance, courage, justice

Classical Greek philosophers considered the foremost virtues to be prudence, temperance, courage, and justice. Early Christian Church theologians adopted these virtues and considered them to be equally important to all people, whether they were Christian or not.

The Theological Virtues:
love, hope, faith

St. Paul defined the three chief virtues as love, which was the essential nature of God, hope, and faith. Christian Church authorities called them the three theological virtues because they believed the virtues were not natural to man in his fallen state, but were conferred at Baptism.

The Seven Contrary Virtues:
humility, kindness, abstinence, chastity, patience, liberality, diligence

The Contrary Virtues were derived from the Psychomachia ("Battle for the Soul"), an epic poem written by Prudentius (c. 410). Practicing these virtues is alledged to protect one against temptation toward the Seven Deadly Sins: humility against pride, kindness against envy, abstinence against gluttony, chastity against lust, patience against anger, liberality against greed, and diligence against sloth.

The Seven Heavenly Virtues:
faith, hope, charity, fortitude, justice, temperance, prudence

The Heavenly Virtues combine the four Cardinal Virtues: prudence, temperance, fortitude -- or courage, and justice, with a variation of the theological virtues: faith, hope, and charity. I'm still researching the origins and popular usage of this formulation.

The Seven Corporal Works of Mercy

Continuing the numerological mysticism of Seven, the Christian Church assembled a list of seven good works that was included in medieval catechisms. They are: feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, give shelter to strangers, clothe the naked, visit the sick, minister to prisoners, and bury the dead.

[Michele]

The Cardinal Virtues:
prudence, temperance, courage, justice

Classical Greek philosophers considered the foremost virtues to be prudence, temperance, courage, and justice. Early Christian Church theologians adopted these virtues and considered them to be equally important to all people, whether they were Christian or not.

The Theological Virtues:
love, hope, faith

St. Paul defined the three chief virtues as love, which was the essential nature of God, hope, and faith. Christian Church authorities called them the three theological virtues because they believed the virtues were not natural to man in his fallen state, but were conferred at Baptism.

The Seven Contrary Virtues:
humility, kindness, abstinence, chastity, patience, liberality, diligence

The Contrary Virtues were derived from the Psychomachia ("Battle for the Soul"), an epic poem written by Prudentius (c. 410). Practicing these virtues is alledged to protect one against temptation toward the Seven Deadly Sins: humility against pride, kindness against envy, abstinence against gluttony, chastity against lust, patience against anger, liberality against greed, and diligence against sloth.

The Seven Heavenly Virtues:
faith, hope, charity, fortitude, justice, temperance, prudence

The Heavenly Virtues combine the four Cardinal Virtues: prudence, temperance, fortitude -- or courage, and justice, with a variation of the theological virtues: faith, hope, and charity. I'm still researching the origins and popular usage of this formulation.

The Seven Corporal Works of Mercy

Continuing the numerological mysticism of Seven, the Christian Church assembled a list of seven good works that was included in medieval catechisms. They are: feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, give shelter to strangers, clothe the naked, visit the sick, minister to prisoners, and bury the dead.

nice post. this is the stuff with regards to Jesus' teaching on compassion that tends to get lost in all this chest beating about this one sin.... that only some Christian sects feel the need to rah rah about. while those who insist upon focusing only on it, many times commit larger sins, as they forget completely all the other virtues embodied in the words or the book, and break the greatest commandment of the Law.

what did Jesus say on the mount?

Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the
same way you judge others, you will be judged, and
with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your
brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank, in your
own eye? How can you say to your brother, 'Let me
take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is
a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the
plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly
to remove the speck from your brother's eye.
Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your
pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under
their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces.

Matthew 7:3:6

The Greatest Commandment

Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees,
the Pharisees got together. One of them, an expert in
the law, tested him with this question: "Teacher,
which is the greatest commandment in the Law?"

Jesus replied: "Love the Lord your God with all
your heart and with all your soul and with all your
mind. This is the first and greatest commandment.
And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as your-
self.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two
commandments."

Matthew 22:34:40

[Demosthenes II]

I didn't read this whole thread, so if someone could just quote the Bible in their post and tell me were it says homosexuality is bad, please do it.

[ranger]

unbelievable.... so many sins to address

sex before marriage it too a sin... is there anything in the wind for plans to mount a crusade against that as well?

talk about a subject that puts one to :sleep:
No crusade, just lots of prayers.

[Larani]

I put this in another thread and I am putting it here because I believe selfishness in a sin as well. Ignorance is not but denial (lying to oneself sure is)

Arrgghhhh I am so tired of this argument. Pro-Creation is the only rational and logical reason why Homosexuality would be wrong, It is a good argument on the surface. I mean we can all recognize the wisdom in Be fruitful and multiply when the species is riding on the edge of extinction do to plague, or some other natural disaster of from a biblical perspective when humanity must have numbered in the hundreds, but just as be fruitful and multiply made sense and was wise in those situations it didn't mean be fruitful and multiply with stupidity.

Look we can all observe the animal kingdom and can see the relationships between species. If the weather is good and plant life is abundant the deer population grows and grows. Two things counter this natural progression.

1. They eat themselves out of house and home and thus start to starve

2. The wolves and other predators in the areas populations also expand and grow using the abundant food the deer provide until they too eat themselves out of house and home and thus starve.

Now the deer and the wolves we can see have no excuse for their behavior because they cannot observe, and analyze themselves and their surroundings and thus see this correlation, but we can thats what makes us different.

All studies have shown that 2.5 children would be ideal to level off and maintain a world with its current population. We have no excuse other then our own ignorance and selfishness to do what we are doing. We know tens of thousand of people mostly kids are starving daily. We know that many kids come from poor and economically strapped homes who existence is a what matter not education and improving what they know.

These our not the faults of these kids these our the faults of us. I am sooo tired of the not natural argument. It wasn't natural for me to get a vasectomy, it wasn't natural for me to adopt a couple kids out of the foster care system, none of these were natural, but they sure as the hell were smart and wise things to do.

I don't know what Gods position is on this but I do know if he exists he gave us Brains and he expects us to use them. I do know that he can tell if someone is ignorant of facts or who knows the truth but decides to ignore the truth for their own selfish reasons. To him, her, It I leave the decision to know, and for me I will choose to not deny but point out the obvious, but obviously after pointing out the obvious who can claim ignorance upon reading the truth.

The world is not flat, The earth revolves around the sun not the other way around, and if we continue to be fruitful and multiply we will breed ourself out of house and home.

I am not about enforcement I don't believe in imposed authority I believe in education get people to make the choice on their own for the good of themselves and for the rest of us. Peace, Harmony, Balance, symbiosis, Order without these we are doomed to Warfare, Discord, Instability, parasitic, Chaos. It's not to hard to teach these things and its not to hard to not partake in the latter, but the latter will exists if fact needs to exists until we learn these obvious truths. For the latter really is the only thing keeping our population in check in the world for without the latter our populations would be out of the roof and the number of dead and dying from starvation would be in the hundreds of thousands a day not tens of thousands.

I am stepping away from the podium now

[nyguy999]

unbelievable.... so many sins to address

sex before marriage it too a sin... is there anything in the wind for plans to mount a crusade against that as well?

talk about a subject that puts one to :sleep:
:clap: :clap: :clap:

[cpwill]

I didn't read this whole thread, so if someone could just quote the Bible in their post and tell me were it says homosexuality is bad, please do it.

there are a couple places where it specifically lables it as a sin, and a couple of places where it defines marriage as specifically between a man and a woman; which do you want?

found an interesting verse today; in Paul's letter to Timothy, one of his protege's:

2Tim, 4:3-4 For the time is coming when people will not put up with sound doctrine, but having itching ears, they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own desires and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander away to myths.

[Texsand]

You are correct on this statement,we have wannabe christians who basicly in a sense remove what they do not like about the bible and follow what they want.We also have real christians who believe that the whole bible was ordained by God and is holy and follow the scriptures.

It seems today that many people just might as well be literally marking out or cutting out what they do not want to follow in the bible.Then say" well that doesn't apply to today's standards".Then they lead themselve to be in complete denial that they have sinned in the first place.I believe there is a difference between knowing that you are sinning and sinning and be in complete denial the the same time.We must confess and ask for forgiveness for our sins before we are forgiven.If we fool our selves into thinking that homosexuality and other sins are not sin then we will be denied forgivness since we did not acknowledge those sins and did not ask forgivness for doing those sins.






That is the most ridiculus statement I have ever heard,that is more rediculus than my spelling.Do you know why the bible does not mention a prohibition on gay marriage?You must be retarded if you do not know.The act of homosexuality is a sin,a obimination to God ,so why would a prohibition on gay marriage be mentioned and or needed if homosexuality is a sin?
I think you better go do the word study on what abomination meant in those days. And when you do that you find that what the passages in the bible refer to are those worshipping idols which actually would tie into the passage in Timothy CP quotes towards the end of this thread.

[cpwill]

I think you better go do the word study on what abomination meant in those days. And when you do that you find that what the passages in the bible refer to are those worshipping idols which actually would tie into the passage in Timothy CP quotes towards the end of this thread.

not hardly. for one thing, idol-worship wasn't much of a problem for timothy; the most likely reason for this line (as taught by realistic accredited and world-respected academians; not one ex-preacher who was outed as being homosexual himself and is now trying to justify it) would be a response to the very beginnings of the movement that would sprout into gnosticism.

furthermore, when you refer to "those days" are you reffering to 1100BC, 600BC, 90AD, or which time period in which the bible refers to homosexuality as a sin? what about when it doesn't actually refer to homosexuality as an "abomination", but rather as simply "sinful"? or, for example, when the bible defines marriage specifically as a man and a woman?

[cpwill]

they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own desires....

[nyguy999]

not hardly. for one thing, idol-worship wasn't much of a problem for timothy; the most likely reason for this line (as taught by realistic accredited and world-respected academians; not one ex-preacher who was outed as being homosexual himself and is now trying to justify it) would be a response to the very beginnings of the movement that would sprout into gnosticism.

furthermore, when you refer to "those days" are you reffering to 1100BC, 600BC, 90AD, or which time period in which the bible refers to homosexuality as a sin? what about when it doesn't actually refer to homosexuality as an "abomination", but rather as simply "sinful"? or, for example, when the bible defines marriage specifically as a man and a woman?

Why does it matter what the Bible says in regards to current day legislation? I don't believe in the Bible, so I would certainly hope we're not passing lasw just because "The Bible says so". I mean the Bible says divorce is a reason to be put to death, right? But nobody on here is advocating that.

I haven't heard many good reasons against gay marriage. All I hear is that the Bible says it a sin. I would like to hear some other reasons as to why people think gay marriage should not be allowed.

[cpwill]

oh, i don't think anyone's claiming we need to legislate based off off of the book of leviticuse:lol:

people are just pointing out what the title of this thread quite plainly says; that homosexual acts are sinful.

[nyguy999]

people are just pointing out what the title of this thread quite plainly says; that homosexual acts are sinful.

OK. Well so are a lot of other sexuals acts that the vast majority of heterosexuals engage in. ;)

Sin, to me, is an outdated concept. I have no problems with sins where no external parties are harmed. I mean if someone wants to smoke in the privacy of their home, let them. If people want to play poker with their friends, let them. If gays want to have sex amongst themselves, let them. Now sins where someone else is harmed, like murder, are a MUCH different matter. I think we should be focusing on those.

[cpwill]

OK. Well so are a lot of other sexuals acts that the vast majority of heterosexuals engage in. ;)

agreed:)

Sin, to me, is an outdated concept. I have no problems with sins where no external parties are harmed. I mean if someone wants to smoke in the privacy of their home, let them. If people want to play poker with their friends, let them. If gays want to have sex amongst themselves, let them. Now sins where someone else is harmed, like murder, are a MUCH different matter. I think we should be focusing on those.

no one is advocating that we institute a theocracy; we are simply arguing that these things are morally wrong.

[nyguy999]

agreed:)



no one is advocating that we institute a theocracy; we are simply arguing that these things are morally wrong.

Well if you agree in the Bible VERBATIM, then it is morally wrong. But if you don't believe in the Bible, or think that the Bible is more figurative, then you don't necessarilly have to believe that homosexuality is morally wrong.

I always think it's funny that people take the Bible literally for several reasons. First, it wasn't written in English, so you are going off a translation. Second, there are many inconsistencies in the Bible, just a few of which I've listed below.

For example, insects do not have four feet:
LEV 11:21 Yet these may ye eat of every flying creeping thing that goeth upon all four, which have legs above their feet, to leap withal upon the earth;
LEV 11:22 Even these of them ye may eat; the locust after his kind, and the bald locust after his kind, and the beetle after his kind, and the grasshopper after his kind.
LEV 11:23 But all other flying creeping things, which have four feet, shall be an abomination unto you.

How old was Ahaziah when he began to reign?
22 in 2 Kings 8:26
42 in 2 Chron 22:2

WHo was Josiah's successor?
Jehoahaz - 2 Chron 36:1
Shallum - Jeremiah 22:11

[Larani]

they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own desires....

cpwill I think Paul was referring to those who used Dogma vs rationality and science. Think of it this way look at how many decades went by while the religious dogma was the earth was the center of the universe and anyone who claimed otherwise was outcast as a heretic and in many cases even put to death.

Religious Leaders / Teachers are all prone to lead the flock in ways that make no rational sense whatsoever and the flock well they love to have leaders / teachers who can back up their opinions even if it they don't make sense they legitimize their beliefs. This is what I think Paul was referring too.

Hell look at my earlier post and not one comment, can you guess why not?

[cpwill]

cpwill I think Paul was referring to those who used Dogma vs rationality and science.

almost the opposite, in fact, it was an injunction against moving away from doctrine.

Think of it this way look at how many decades went by while the religious dogma was the earth was the center of the universe and anyone who claimed otherwise was outcast as a heretic and in many cases even put to death.

not even decades, but centuries. how does that effect the writings of Paul (which took place centuries beforehand) one iota?

Religious Leaders / Teachers are all prone to lead the flock in ways that make no rational sense whatsoever and the flock well they love to have leaders / teachers who can back up their opinions even if it they don't make sense they legitimize their beliefs. This is what I think Paul was referring too.

yes, he was warning of those who try to alter teachings and doctrine to fit their own personal desires and those of their listeners.

Hell look at my earlier post and not one comment, can you guess why not?

nope, why do you think?

[heel31ok]

you know this verse pulled from Romans is kind of racist anyway.

It is only speaking to gentiles.
It would not be racist because the Hebrews already knew it was a sin.

[Larani]

almost the opposite, in fact, it was an injunction against moving away from doctrine.

That is how your interpreting it or at least how someone else has and your just parroting their interpretation. Tell me would that be a wise thing to do? If I were to say jump off a bridge thats what the scripture says would you do it without question? May I ask do you believe that to question Authority is to disrespect Authority?



not even decades, but centuries. how does that effect the writings of Paul (which took place centuries beforehand) one iota?

Well your right on the time line thing I am wrong, of course the devils in the details the point still stands whether it decades or centuries or millennium Just as Jesus's parables were never about fig trees :lol:

Time is scripture is important to a point. We can all understand why Fig Trees and Sheep and Shepard's were used to make a point it was the world in which the listeners lived they could relate. As to how that effect Paul's writings well as I said that depends on how one see it does it not. Just as one might interpret Jesus use of a fig tree could be about proper fertilization and maintaining a good water supply for a good Fig Harvest.



yes, he was warning of those who try to alter teachings and doctrine to fit their own personal desires and those of their listeners.

Was he?



nope, why do you think?

Nope what. Cannot answer, will not answer? Didn't bother to look at it and have no idea? I already know what I think don't have to ask myself what is obvious I was asking what you thought.

Sharing goes both ways my friend :)

[heel31ok]

THis subject goes to the question do you believe that the Bible is the final authority ? if so , then homosexuality is a Sin. If not , it could go either way according to whatever standard you apply to govern your life and world view.I personally go by what the Bible says.

[Larani]

THis subject goes to the question do you believe that the Bible is the final authority ? if so , then homosexuality is a Sin. If not , it could go either way according to whatever standard you apply to govern your life and world view.I personally go by what the Bible says.


So if I understand what you said you would encourage us all to be fruitful and multiply regardless of the obvious consequences because the bible say's so?

[heel31ok]

[QUOTE=Larani]So if I understand what you said you would encourage us all to be fruitful and multiply regardless of the obvious consequences because the bible say's so?[/QUOTE
No , only those who have committed themselves to the teachings of the Bible. If you don't belive in it why would I or anyone else require it of you?

[Texsand]

not hardly. for one thing, idol-worship wasn't much of a problem for timothy; the most likely reason for this line (as taught by realistic accredited and world-respected academians; not one ex-preacher who was outed as being homosexual himself and is now trying to justify it) would be a response to the very beginnings of the movement that would sprout into gnosticism.

furthermore, when you refer to "those days" are you reffering to 1100BC, 600BC, 90AD, or which time period in which the bible refers to homosexuality as a sin? what about when it doesn't actually refer to homosexuality as an "abomination", but rather as simply "sinful"? or, for example, when the bible defines marriage specifically as a man and a woman?
Pardon idol worship wasn't much of a problem for Timothy? The Romans were just as pagan as were all the nations that Jews were to hold themselves separate from. CP you strain at a camel to swallow a gnat. Where does the bible specifically metions marriage as between a man and woman only?

You remind me of the pharisees that kept trying to make the things Jesus said and did as sinful and evil when all he did was teach and act in love for even those nastly ol Samaritans. I wouldn't be so quick to judge the love two homosexuals share as something sinful if I were you, but if you want to judge go right on ahead.

[Michele]

and to emphasize your point Texsand I feel it has merit to repost the below post as a reminder of the 2 Greater Commandments that, according to Jesus Christ, ALL LAWS hang on.

nice post. this is the stuff with regards to Jesus' teaching on compassion that tends to get lost in all this chest beating about this one sin.... that only some Christian sects feel the need to rah rah about. while those who insist upon focusing only on it, many times commit larger sins, as they forget completely all the other virtues embodied in the words or the book, and break the greatest commandment of the Law.