At What Point?

[Into the Night]

Nah, I'm just laughing about how you secretly get a little thrill thinking of your superiority in regards to an "in" with God.

It's plastered all over every one of your posts. Hope that all who say "Lord, Lord"...well, you presumably know the rest of that verse.

You are hallucinating again. He made no such statement.

 

[Into the Night]

No, I think you just want to hate gay people and you are trying to figure out how to square the Bible with your hatred. It's a tale as old as time.

Remember when 'gay' meant 'happy'? Yet another perversion of the English language, as well as perversion of sex.

Jesus Christ NEVER condoned homosexual behavior. He condemned it. It is a perversion of sexual relations, and does not produce children (part of God's plan). It is a selfish behavior. It exposes one to risks and diseases that are unique to this practice.

There is no way to justify such behavior, not with anything in Christianity.

In Israel for a time, people were stoned to death for this behavior, since it can put society as a whole at risk, when conducted in a world with little or nothing in the way of medicine and the way it acts as a temptation for others into this behavior.

There is no way to square the practice of homosexuality with Christianity or the Bible or Jesus Christ or God.

 

[Into the Night]

No, I think you just want to hate gay people and you are trying to figure out how to square the Bible with your hatred. It's a tale as old as time.

You are hallucinating again. He never mentioned hating 'gay people'. He condemns the practice, just as Jesus Christ did.

 

[domer76]

No we can look at the words and reach agreement on whats being said. It was like that for 1500 years before Luther decided he didn't like what Scripture said so he changed it. That opened then door to personal interpretation now we have 30,000 Christian denominations.

Being proud and being prideful aren't the same thing

There was never any agreement on what is said. Not in the OT. Not in the NT.

The early Israelites had many gods and they differed from region to region. From community to community. Know what the deciding factor was on what god emerged? Whoever was the king, the leader, the winner of the last war.

Your scripture has always changed to fix the problems. From the polytheistic beginnings to henotheism until the so-called monotheistic version. The concept of the Messiah to the divinity of Jesus. The Trinity. On and on.

Since gods are the invention of man, that’s what happens. And will continue to be that way.

 

[Kafka]

Remember when 'gay' meant 'happy'? Yet another perversion of the English language, as well as perversion of sex.

Jesus Christ NEVER condoned homosexual behavior. He condemned it. It is a perversion of sexual relations, and does not produce children (part of God's plan). It is a selfish behavior. It exposes one to risks and diseases that are unique to this practice.

There is no way to justify such behavior, not with anything in Christianity.

In Israel for a time, people were stoned to death for this behavior, since it can put society as a whole at risk, when conducted in a world with little or nothing in the way of medicine and the way it acts as a temptation for others into this behavior.

There is no way to square the practice of homosexuality with Christianity or the Bible or Jesus Christ or God.

I agree that the Bible is pretty clear on how evil homosexuality is. But given that God evolves now we have entire churches that openly welcome gay people as if they were REAL HUMANS! Imagine that.

If you want to hate gay people and you want to think your god approves of it, knock yourself out. It's your faith. There are a lot of people who value HATRED like you do. So you can get together with them and hate.

 

[Kafka]

You are hallucinating again. He never mentioned hating 'gay people'. He condemns the practice, just as Jesus Christ did.

LOL. Whatever, homophobe. You do you.

 

[Ross Dolan]

There is no more or less prejudice in the church for homosexuals than there is for fornicators or rapists or bank robbers. It's not the people it's the behavior.

Another of your delusions.

 

[Ross Dolan]

So you dont know that Jesus told people he forgave to not sin anymore? Would you like the passages?

As Obtenebrator said, "Enjoy the hate."

 

[Cypress]

I do not know of any mainstream Christian denomination that currently follows the laws of the Torah...but it appears that the early Christians (mainly Jews who considered Jesus to be the fulfillment of the Messianic prediction)...DID.

Here is an essay (one of several I have written on this topic) I wrote to someone in another forum where I participated. The points I made there apply to here.

In an excellent thread devoted to tolerance, charity, and compassion toward our fellow humans who happen to be homosexuals, Real Preacher mentioned several passages in Acts which he interprets, in effect, to disassociate Christianity from any obligations to “the law” of Old Testament.

The facts are these: Acts 15 (the material Preacher cites) deals with a meeting that took place in Jerusalem between the presbyters of the community church, Peter, Paul, Barnabas, possibly other unnamed apostles, and possibly lay members of the community. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss a controversy that had arisen among the converted Pharisees of Antioch—who were of the opinion that Christianity was a religion that should be open only to Jews. They were openly distrustful of Paul, who was intent on converting gentiles as well.

In any case, the subject controversy was that the Pharisees were especially troubled by the fact that Paul allowed gentile converts to come into the new religion without being circumcised—a compromise they thought would lead to greater and more troubling (for them) concessions to the law. In fact, the specific item on the agenda appears to have been the non-circumcision of Titus (later, St. Titus)—a Greek gentile convert who was a frequently companion to Paul on his travels among the gentiles.

The meeting, an important early Christian meeting, is not only mentioned by Luke in Acts 15, but also by Paul in his letter to the Galatians, Chapter 2 (particularly verses 1-10.)

Both Acts and Galatians indicate that the main instigation for the meeting was the question of whether or not the act of circumcision was a necessary requirement for gentile converts to the newly formed religion. The question of whether dietary restrictions should be imposed was quickly included…and while there are some differences of opinions as to how that last part was resolved, the “minutes” of the meeting (actually a letter to the Christian community in Antioch) indicate that some dietary obligations remained in effect.

The group, in the letter, invokes the agreement of The Holy Spirit in the decision. Circumcision, it was decided, was definitely NOT a requirement for membership. The dietary resolution has some minor ambivalence. Galatians seems to indicate that no dietary restrictions were required of the new gentile converts, or at least, none are specifically mentioned. Acts 15: 23-29 specifically states that the letter which outlined the results of the deliberations included the following, “…it is the decision of the Holy Spirit, and ours too, that we will not lay upon you (gentile converts) any burden beyond that which is strictly necessary, namely, to abstain from meat sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals, and from illicit sexual union. You will be well advised to avoid these things.”

In any case, anyone who reads the material in Galatians or Acts as justification for divorcing Christianity from the Old Testament law really is stretching things a great deal. The deliberations seem to have been almost exclusively confined to considerations of circumcision and dietary laws.

But even if that stretch is deemed proper and reasonable (which intelligent, well-intentioned people can do), there is absolutely no logical way to suppose any perceived divorce from Old Testament law includes the right to suppose that the things that pleased or offended the god of the Bible as indicated in the Old Testament…no longer applied. If an orthodox Jew was obliged to accept that murder and stealing and fornicating and lusting offended the god of the Bible—Christians were also. If an orthodox Jew was obliged to accept that homosexuality offended the god—Christians were also.

Real Preacher was using the material in Acts 15 to say that the laws of the Old Testament no longer apply to Christians. Specifically, he was challenging the passage at Leviticus 20:13, “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.”

My argument is: Okay, if you want to stretch the passage in Acts to mean that “the law” no longer applies to Christians, you can logically argue that Christians are under no obligation to put homosexuals to death. But you cannot, on the basis of that stretch, logically argue that homosexual activity is not an abomination in the eyes of the god of the Bible.

NOTE: My personal opinion is that the best guess that can be made about the Bible is that it is a self-serving history of the early Hebrew people interspersed with a fanciful religious mythology. My opinion is that the best guess that can be made about the religious aspects of the Bible is that the people writing the material—the people inventing the god—put their prejudices into the mouth of the god they invented. Almost all of the anger, hatred, and prejudice against homosexuals today has their genesis in the biblical mythology—and has absolutely no place in the hearts and minds of people supposedly as intelligent as we. It is my opinion that the unwarranted prejudice against homosexuals should end not because people are able to justify disregarding the more obviously silly ravings of a mythical god…but because we, as an intelligent and basically fair species, should see such prejudice for the ignorance it is.

Nice post.

Yes, I don't think the New Testament voids the prohibition against murder, theft, adultery in the OT. Those can be thought of divine eternal law. The fact that Jesus' sermons and parables about proper moral justice and human relations echo the divine moral law in the OT means in theory, you don't have to turn the pages back to the OT to see those laws... those eternal moral laws are echoed in the moral teachings of Jesus -- they're in the NT, you don't have to flip the pages back to the OT to understand the eternal divine law.

It's the Jewish law in Torah that Paul wrote doesn't apply to gentiles. I don't know of a single Christian church that requires any of the extensive ritual law in Torah.

Even most Jews no longer practice the ritual law. Certainly not reform Judaism or conservative Judaism. I think it's basically only the Orthodox Jewish minority that keeps sabbath and kosher laws.

Torah is only the books of Moses, a fairly minor part of the OT. I never felt like all the extensive Hebrew history in the OT was very important or fundamental for the Christian liturgy. The wisdom literature and poetry in the OT is nice. I don't recall it ever being included as a key part of the Christian liturgy or sacrament. The OT is there for reference, and prophecy.

I think the reason the OT reads some differently from the NT is because the OT is based on a Mesopotamian cultural and religious motif. The NT was written by Hellenized Jews, and influenced by Greek philosophy and Greek Hellenized culture.

 

[Kafka]

...

 

[Kafka]

...

 

[Into the Night]

There was never any agreement on what is said. Not in the OT. Not in the NT.

The early Israelites had many gods and they differed from region to region. From community to community. Know what the deciding factor was on what god emerged? Whoever was the king, the leader, the winner of the last war.

Your scripture has always changed to fix the problems. From the polytheistic beginnings to henotheism until the so-called monotheistic version. The concept of the Messiah to the divinity of Jesus. The Trinity. On and on.

Since gods are the invention of man, that’s what happens. And will continue to be that way.

Making shit up won't work, Dumber.

 

[Into the Night]

I agree that the Bible is pretty clear on how evil homosexuality is. But given that God evolves now we have entire churches that openly welcome gay people as if they were REAL HUMANS! Imagine that.

If you want to hate gay people and you want to think your god approves of it, knock yourself out. It's your faith. There are a lot of people who value HATRED like you do. So you can get together with them and hate.

Neither God nor Jesus Christ condone homosexuality. Churches that accept this practice are ignoring the gospel of God and Jesus Christ and are preaching a falsehood.

You are making a non-sequitur fallacy. I don't hate homosexuals, but they do their own damage to themselves.

 

[Into the Night]

LOL. Whatever, homophobe. You do you.

Try English next time. It works better.

 

[Into the Night]

Another of your delusions.

Random phrase. No apparent coherency.

 

[Into the Night]

As Obtenebrator said, "Enjoy the hate."

Non-sequitur fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

Nice post.

Yes, I don't think the New Testament voids the prohibition against murder, theft, adultery in the OT. Those can be thought of divine eternal law. The fact that Jesus' sermons and parables about proper moral justice and human relations echo the divine moral law in the OT means in theory, you don't have to turn the pages back to the OT to see those laws... those eternal moral laws are echoed in the moral teachings of Jesus -- they're in the NT, you don't have to flip the pages back to the OT to understand the eternal divine law.

It's the Jewish law in Torah that Paul wrote doesn't apply to gentiles. I don't know of a single Christian church that requires any of the extensive ritual law in Torah.

Even most Jews no longer practice the ritual law. Certainly not reform Judaism or conservative Judaism. I think it's basically only the Orthodox Jewish minority that keeps sabbath and kosher laws.

Torah is only the books of Moses, a fairly minor part of the OT. I never felt like all the extensive Hebrew history in the OT was very important or fundamental for the Christian liturgy. The wisdom literature and poetry in the OT is nice. I don't recall it ever being included as a key part of the Christian liturgy or sacrament. The OT is there for reference, and prophecy.

I think the reason the OT reads some differently from the NT is because the OT is based on a Mesopotamian cultural and religious motif. The NT was written by Hellenized Jews, and influenced by Greek philosophy and Greek Hellenized culture.

Making shit up won't work, Sybil.

 

[Kafka]

Try English next time. It works better.

Try not being a douche. It works better.

 

[Kafka]

I don't hate homosexuals, but they do their own damage to themselves.

Look in the mirror and tell yourself when you chose to be straight. If it's all a choice it was a choice for you as well.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Look in the mirror and tell yourself when you chose to be straight. If it's all a choice it was a choice for you as well.

do you believe the same to be true of murderers?.........if Lizzie Bordon had to choose to chop her parents up with an axe did everyone else have to choose not to?......if that cannibal from Wisconsin had to choose to kill and eat his victims, did the rest of us have to choose not to?.....