WWJD, or say about homosexuality...?

Jarod said:
That is not what I am saying, I am simply saying that there are no actions on earth that are fixed in stone always sin. Sin is based on a larger principal that one can use as a lens to determine if the action is sinful or not. If you are living a lie or not to the glory of God, you are sinning.
Click to expand...

You have no comprehension of the topic. Your moronic ramblings simply solidify your stupidity for the board.

Tell us Garud... when is murder, theft, adultery NOT a sin?
 
Damocles said:
This post of yours is just an indication of spin. Christ spoke directly to the woman, he never said she was innocent, and then told her to go forth and sin no more.

Pretty much everything in your OP that I spoke to is wrong. You gave this example as him "sitting with a prostitute to give her comfort"...

He didn't do any of that. He came upon the execution of an adultress, not a prostitute, there is no indication he "sat with her to comfort her", he didn't even forgive the sin at that time. He got them to stop killing her then informed her to leave and not sin any longer. That you try to pretend that the salient action didn't matter at all is preposterous nonsense and dancing to get past the fact that you are just making stuff up.

He did not pretend it was not a sin, he told her to stop doing it.

Now, your view of "sin" is far more Eastern than it is Western. In Western religions there is a list of stuff that is simply listed "this is a sin", in Eastern religions (Buddhism specifically) it isn't the action of adultery that is the sin, it is the suffering you cause through the action that makes it a "sin".
Click to expand...

I read the words, I ahve studied translations from older texts. I have a very different interpretation than you. I dont really care if he sat or stood and if it was a prostitute or simple adulterer. What matters to me in this sense is that he did not define any sin.

Additionally, he did not happen upon an execution, they brought her to them and asked what they should do, they were trying to set him up in an imposable situation, still irrelevant to this discussion. The fact is that Jesus, the only one there who was without sin told did not consider the allegations made against the woman, and did not stone her himself (even though he is without sin). He told her to go and to sin no more. That does not mean he was addressing adultery. It is not just sloppiness that Jesus never defines or addresses particular sins. In fact, when asked he simply gave an overriding principal.

You seem to believe the fundamental interpertation, and I am sorry for that because if one believes it, leads, in my opinion the opposite of a Christian life.
 
leaningright said:
Basically Jarod, to me you seem to be saying that there is no sin...or at least Jesus didn't consider anything to be sinful. I really can't follow exactly. And if not committing adultery, fornication or theft because they are sin is "obeying dark old rules" then Jesus might as well have stayed where He was. Like I say, I may have you wrong but it's hard to follow. And you are correct in this, I shouldn't laugh.
Click to expand...

There is sin everywhere. Everyone on Earth is a sinner.

My point is that there is not a list of activities that automatically constitute sin, Jesus knew better than to do that because the world is ever changing. A fundamentalist fails to see this and often focuses on the small instead of the overriding principals that Jesus used.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
du'h......yet you want to pretend he didn't think she was a sinner?......
Click to expand...

You really have a reading comprehension problem, or you just want to pretend that I said something different because what I said scares you?

He knew she was a sinner, just like he knew all of her accusers were sinners, and every other human.
 
Jarod said:
Matthew 22: 35 - 40 (traditional interpretation)

[35] Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying,
[36] Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
[37] Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
[38] This is the first and great commandment.
[39] And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
[40] On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

So where in there does Jesus mention homosexuality? Did Jesus define any individual sins? NO, he gave an overriding principal. Specifics don't work because society and culture change and that is a universal. Specific acts that are sinful in one situation may not be in another situation. If you are loving God and your neighbor, no matter who he is, you are not sinning. That means that if God created you with a focus on homosexual sexuality, if you live your live loving (respecting) what God gave you, if you celebrate and parse God with it, if you use your God given self in a way that loves (respects) others, you are not sinning.
Click to expand...

Jarod, he quoted the OT summary of the Ten Commandments.....specific acts are either obedience or disobedience......Jesus didn't change the summary or the overriding principle......he gave humanity an alternate method of salvation, because unwavering compliance with that overriding principle was beyond our capability......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
Jarod, he quoted the OT summary of the Ten Commandments.....specific acts are either obedience or disobedience......Jesus didn't change the summary or the overriding principle......he gave humanity an alternate method of salvation, because unwavering compliance with that overriding principle was beyond our capability......
Click to expand...

There were 631 Commandments. Du'h
 
PostmodernProphet said:
Jarod, he quoted the OT summary of the Ten Commandments.....specific acts are either obedience or disobedience......Jesus didn't change the summary or the overriding principle......he gave humanity an alternate method of salvation, because unwavering compliance with that overriding principle was beyond our capability......
Click to expand...

He offered a change in that he said that not following the first two commandments were the primary definitions of sin and that all other rules flow from them.
 
kiki said:
There were 631 Commandments. Du'h
Click to expand...

actually, there were probably 9, the Jews considered the first commandment to be "I am the Lord your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt"....the Catholics dropped that one, but to keep 10 they split the "covets" into two commandments.....
 
Jarod said:
I read the words, I ahve studied translations from older texts. I have a very different interpretation than you. I dont really care if he sat or stood and if it was a prostitute or simple adulterer. What matters to me in this sense is that he did not define any sin.

Additionally, he did not happen upon an execution, they brought her to them and asked what they should do, they were trying to set him up in an imposable situation, still irrelevant to this discussion. The fact is that Jesus, the only one there who was without sin told did not consider the allegations made against the woman, and did not stone her himself (even though he is without sin). He told her to go and to sin no more. That does not mean he was addressing adultery. It is not just sloppiness that Jesus never defines or addresses particular sins. In fact, when asked he simply gave an overriding principal.

You seem to believe the fundamental interpertation, and I am sorry for that because if one believes it, leads, in my opinion the opposite of a Christian life.
Click to expand...
ROFLMAO... sure you have Garud.
 
Leviticus 19:18

"'Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone among your people, but love your neighbor as yourself."

on this hangs all the law and the prophets....even postmodern ones.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
actually, there were probably 9, the Jews considered the first commandment to be "I am the Lord your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt"....the Catholics dropped that one, but to keep 10 they split the "covets" into two commandments.....
Click to expand...

Must you always act so ignorant? There were 631.
 
Enslaving someone is a sin as allowed under Deuteronomy and selling your daughter is today, in my opinion, generally a sin.
 
Jarod said:
You really have a reading comprehension problem, or you just want to pretend that I said something different because what I said scares you?

He knew she was a sinner, just like he knew all of her accusers were sinners, and every other human.
Click to expand...

then why are you trying so hard to pretend he didn't consider it a sin?.......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top