C
Cancel5
Guest
Oh, excuse, I will be more accurate in the future.
What's a Preacher to do?
- Thread starter DamnYankee
- Start date
charver
You lookin' at my pint?
First of all i'm not claiming only Christians are "like that".
Secondly, i'm rather judgemental about all kinds of people whether they are prone to hanging about churches of a weekend or not. I'm a lot more judgemental on message boards though.
Thirdly, if there are any Christians out there who are "as human" as i am then they're well and truly buggered and no error.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
First of all i'm not claiming only Christians are "like that".
Secondly, i'm rather judgemental about all kinds of people whether they are prone to hanging about churches of a weekend or not. I'm a lot more judgemental on message boards though.
Thirdly, if there are any Christians out there who are "as human" as i am then they're well and truly buggered and no error.
lol, ok, i misread your post
Isn't that in the next verse in Armaments III, right after the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch?
C
Cancel5
Guest
"And the Lord did grin...then thou shalt count to three, no more, no less, three shalt be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three; four shalt thou not count; nor either count thou two, accepting that thou then proceed to three. Five is right out, once the number three, being the third number be reached, then lobbeth thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who being naughty in my sight shall snuffeth.
One, two, five...
Three, sir
One, two, five...
Three, sir
maineman
Banned
As I have said, I believe that the writers of both the old and new testament prohibitions against homosexuality did so without the sort of understanding that we have today about such behavior. OT writers believed that man's seed contained all of the essence of new life and that, therefore, homosexual conduct or even masturbation, was tantamount to murder... we know that is not true.
Paul repeatedly used the word for male prostitute when discussing homosexuality and talked about men going against their true nature. He too, was unaware of the fact that homosexuality is the true nature of many individuals and that homosexual behavior was not confined to sexual deviation from one's "normal" behavior, but could, in fact, occur within the context of a monogamous, loving relationship.
Additionally, anti-gay rights "christians" love to focus on the few passages from Paul and hold THEM sacrosanct, yet ignore many OTHER edicts from him that just as virulently condemn behavior such as drunkenness and adultery or those that condone slavery. If you are going to believe in Paul's words verbatim, then believe in them ALL...if not, then accept the fact that other equally devout individuals today might downplay different Pauline passages than you do.
Paul repeatedly used the word for male prostitute when discussing homosexuality and talked about men going against their true nature. He too, was unaware of the fact that homosexuality is the true nature of many individuals and that homosexual behavior was not confined to sexual deviation from one's "normal" behavior, but could, in fact, occur within the context of a monogamous, loving relationship.
Additionally, anti-gay rights "christians" love to focus on the few passages from Paul and hold THEM sacrosanct, yet ignore many OTHER edicts from him that just as virulently condemn behavior such as drunkenness and adultery or those that condone slavery. If you are going to believe in Paul's words verbatim, then believe in them ALL...if not, then accept the fact that other equally devout individuals today might downplay different Pauline passages than you do.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
thank you for finally admitting the bible is not the word of god....and that you feel you can take bits and parts that fit your agenda and use them for your purpose.
you have no idea what paul knew or did not know. that is the biggest assumption anyone could make. as if people back then did not live in homosexual relationships....greeks etc...such thinking is purely nonsensical and lacks a true understanding of the world.
the words are unequivocal and the bible is consistant throughout regarding homosexuality. i gave you verses, and they were NOT all paul, which you conveniently ignore, because again, you are only concerned with YOUR agenda and care nothing for the truth or for christ words. they mean something to you only when it suits you. it appears religion for you is just like politics....you only believe and accept that which fits your world view.
how sad.
you have no idea what paul knew or did not know. that is the biggest assumption anyone could make. as if people back then did not live in homosexual relationships....greeks etc...such thinking is purely nonsensical and lacks a true understanding of the world.
the words are unequivocal and the bible is consistant throughout regarding homosexuality. i gave you verses, and they were NOT all paul, which you conveniently ignore, because again, you are only concerned with YOUR agenda and care nothing for the truth or for christ words. they mean something to you only when it suits you. it appears religion for you is just like politics....you only believe and accept that which fits your world view.
how sad.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
1. Homosexuality as a sin is discussed in the Torah. The Torah was dictated to Moses directly from God. Do you think that you, as an 'enlightened modern man', understand the sin of homosexuality better than God?
2. Please provide evidence of your assertion that the Bible states that masturbation is "tantamount to murder".
charver
You lookin' at my pint?
Actually, you may want to hold your horses there, because God left a message on my answering machine last week saying he was "sorry about that big gay mix up thing with Moses". Apparently Moses was notorious for being a bit deaf (at that age you can't blame the old sod) and his mind had already begun to wander long before the 'God incident' (he was convinced he was a teenage dancer called Simone since blowing out the 235 candles on his birthday cake)
Anyway, that invalidates your Moses thing.
Next.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
what are you talking about? making stuff up again... obviously...can't defend your position, so you have to attack me. i at least show you how i believe your thinking is wrong and provide evidence...which you now ignore and all you do is ad hom....pathetic little preacher...who knows full well i have posted at least 3 times in this thread that i am sinner and not called of god (unlike you who runs around calling others phony christians and runs around with a preacher/god like complex)
unlike you, i would have considered your rebuttal and in fact considered your reply and gave you mine back with supporting thoughts and evidence. all you do is attack like a rabid dog. your mind is made up and thats that. you are blind to accepting any truth that does not fit your world view.
i challenge you to provide which parts i "dismiss". if you are talking the health/hygiene part already discussed, then i'm sorry, but comparing a health issue back then to a SIN is naive at best and dishonest at worst. the new testament did not mention those things again, whereas the NT is quite clear that homosexuality is A SIN.
i won't wait for you to show me which parts i accept and don't. because it is not true and when you lie and are wrong you run away. hopefully you won't this time PREACHER.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
You bring up a good point Yurt that unhealthy practices were considered sins in the OT and homosexual practices are still unhealthy.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
i did not mean it that way. imo, the hygiene rules were not sins like homosexuality. they were not called on abomination like homosexuality. you were not at risk of not inheriting the kingdom. i don't even know if the "preacher" is talking about that when he claims i pick and choose from the bible, i'm guessing though as he brought it up earlier to someone else. he is just lashing out and attacking others instead of calmly and rationally explaining his view. you would think as a preacher, one who has bragged about that status on at least two boards, would take the time to more fully explain his position.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them
as far as i know, if you broke a hygiene rule, you were not put to death. sodom was destroyed for, among other things, men knowing other men like women....
here is an interesting perspective that seemingly fits maineman, however, i am loathe to say so with absolute certainty as i have no authority to do so:
i do know this, there is absolutely zero foundation to assert that paul simply was not referring to a "loving monogamous" relationship between homosexuals. as can be seen above, in paul's day they very much did have those types of relationships, further, all one has to do is take a cursory glance at the history of homosexuality to discern that men have been in "loving" relationships with other men for thousands of years. to claim that paul did not know of such relationships is naive at best and dishonest at worst.
as far as i know, if you broke a hygiene rule, you were not put to death. sodom was destroyed for, among other things, men knowing other men like women....
here is an interesting perspective that seemingly fits maineman, however, i am loathe to say so with absolute certainty as i have no authority to do so:
i do know this, there is absolutely zero foundation to assert that paul simply was not referring to a "loving monogamous" relationship between homosexuals. as can be seen above, in paul's day they very much did have those types of relationships, further, all one has to do is take a cursory glance at the history of homosexuality to discern that men have been in "loving" relationships with other men for thousands of years. to claim that paul did not know of such relationships is naive at best and dishonest at worst.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
The most logical explanation is that maineman's either lying about being a preacher. Either that or he's lying about the UCC's position on homosexuality not being a sin, or that UCC is lying.
maineman
Banned
are you suggesting that you give all of Paul's admonitions equal weight?
If you do, then I was wrong.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
i don't even know all his admonitions, but i knew you were making stuff about me that you had no reason to...you merely guessed...
what has this to do with homosexuality being a sin? of course nothing. throughout the entire bible homosexuality has been called a sin, this was never abrogated by anyone. that is a fact. you are using your logic to trump god's logic, and we know who the first to do that was. i've already shown you how you can't claim paul did not know about monogamous male/male relationships. in the beginning, it was said that man and woman would leave their parents and be as one. there is simply no supportable evidence, circumstantial or direct, that shows the bible was not talking about a "loving" relationship....
i have no problem if you want to do that without lying with your male partner as with a woman, but the bible is unequivocal that to lie with a man as with a woman is an abomination, period.
i thank you for your explanation, but that explanation has only led to more questions than answers.
maineman
Banned
you have shown me nothing of any consequence whatsoever that showed that Paul, or any new testament author, comprehended monogamous homosexual relationships or that he, or any new testament author regarded homosexuality as anything other than an abandonment of normal behavior.
I explained to you that, to the hebrews of the OT, the man carried in him, the essence of life and that homosexual behavior was, therefore tantamount to murder in that the seed spilled in that endeavor was the lives of children yet born.
And there are a host of abominations in both the OT and in the writings of Paul that today's society doesn't seem to take very seriously.... but that one about homosexuality, for some reason, gets held up as sacrosanct when the others aren't.
And in the final analysis, if you don't agree with those who think that Christianity and homosexuality can co-exist, then, by all means, stay away from Open and Affirming Congregations of the United Church of Christ... by all means stay away from Maine and Iowa and Vermont and any other state that legalizes gay marriage. I would certainly not want to force my religious beliefs down your throat.
Here is an interesting link...http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibh2.htm
I wonder how many of the 613 commandments God gave to Moses YOU consider relevant and binding on your life today.
Last edited:
C
Cancel5
Guest
To Paul the best thing for people to do was stay celibate. He also thought that virgins were more likely to get into heaven.
He, like Jesus, believed that they were in the "end times"
He, like Jesus, believed that they were in the "end times"
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
don't throw strawmen around....
i NEVER said christians and homosexuals cannot coexist. i've had pissing matches with OCA on this very subject. i don't expect you to remember every argument i've had, you probably only remember i support gay marriage for a legal reason...fair enough, but i have never said that.
in this very thread i said i am not superior to any homosexual, i am as big a sinner as they are. i, however, do not claim what i do is not a sin. see the difference?
i've often wondered about those other commandments and everything paul said. i've studied it, talked to people and i still do not feel i have a 100% answer. but i do not go around saying those things are not sin. i don't know. some say the 613 (sans the 10) were nailed to the cross. some say the 4th commandment was changed and made into sunday, the day christ rose. the first i can see being a subject of debate, the second, no, christ kept the same day as the jews. but that is my opinion. homosexuality as see as akin to the second, it was never up for debate and in fact, it was repeated that anal sex is not good and those that partake will not inherit.
it was not an issue in that day that gay marriage was any different than gay sex. it was known that sex is sex regardless if you attach "marriage" or "monogamy" to it. the sin was not titled: you do it with more than one partner....it was a simply a sin based upon the act and it takes only one time to complete the act.
do you support incest? because the bible is against, but there are people who want to marry their brother/sister/mother/father.....do you support that as not a sin? why or why not.....they want to be monogamous in a loving relationship they want to marry.....do you support their right to do so and would you invite them to your church and tell them that it was not a sin?