Fundamental(ist )Humor(this is not funny)

[audible]

Dave:
I read it, duh!.
you ask where in scripture it said kill gays and it was answered, there was no need of an explanation.
I came to the same conclusion as pavlos, it dont matter who it was said to and why, its in your book.
and jesus was a jew so why to you separate yourself from that fact.
christians, jews muslims etc all religious, we dont make any kind of distinction, between them. ok!

 

[davewhite04]

Dave:
I read it, duh!.
you ask where in scripture it said kill gays and it was answered, there was no need of an explanation.
I came to the same conclusion as pavlos, it dont matter who it was said to and why, its in your book.
and jesus was a jew so why to you separate yourself from that fact.
christians, jews muslims etc all religious, we dont make any kind of distinction, between them. ok!

Hello Audible,

You may have read the scripture but you have not accepted my explanation, as obviously you have no intention of learning you prefer, it seems, to just misquote scripture without understanding the context in which it was written.

Christians follow Jesus' teachings, not words written specifically to Levit priests.

Dave

 

[Lemming3k]

whatever happened to the bible being gods words?

 

[davewhite04]

whatever happened to the bible being gods words?

Hello Lemming3k,

Who said anything to the contrary? When you read the scripture you have to understand exactly which audience the scripture was applicable to, doesn't mean the words were not from God.

Does God still think that homosexual activity is detestible? Yes, I would think he does, just like any other sin. But the difference is, we(Christians) are not to judge others lest we be judged, so we should not even bad mouth gays never mind kill them.

Dave

BTW I don't want this to turn into being gay is natural etc. I just want to clear up what my initial post in this thread explained.

 

[Cyperium]

perhaps i've got this wrong, but it appears to me the you and your god are advocating pedophilia, wife bashing, torturer, alcoholism, thrill killing.
because thats how it reads.
just one example.
Fred, you're a twisted bigoted idiot. There's nothing wrong with pedophilia. If I didn't want people to (be)pedophiles, I could easily have made it impossible.

Of course you got it wrong...

Think of what he might have meant (do you really think he advocates these things?).

 

[mustafhakofi]

Hello Audible,

You may have read the scripture but you have not accepted my explanation, as obviously you have no intention of learning you prefer, it seems, to just misquote scripture without understanding the context in which it was written.

Christians follow Jesus' teachings, not words written specifically to Levit priests.

Dave

how is it a mis-quote, if its reprinted how its written, it does not matter if it was in context, or not, its scripture.

Of course you got it wrong...

Think of what he might have meant (do you really think he advocates these things?).

I think everybody knows, what he meant, however you cant change the word ski ,and make it sound right, using the words adstar had choosen.

 

[Lemming3k]

Hello Lemming3k,
Who said anything to the contrary? When you read the scripture you have to understand exactly which audience the scripture was applicable to, doesn't mean the words were not from God.

What im trying to establish is that god let these words be written and claimed as his, he knew this would happen before christ did anything, he knew what the words would be and how they would be interpreted and used, so he therefore agrees with all that is in the book and they are his words, many christians deny this and claim that it is not to be taken literally, when at no point does it state they arnt to be taken literally.

Does God still think that homosexual activity is detestible? Yes, I would think he does, just like any other sin. But the difference is, we(Christians) are not to judge others lest we be judged, so we should not even bad mouth gays never mind kill them.

Again some do some dont, the confusion is due to the wording of the book, which is gods words and he knew exactly how people would interpret them, meaning he is responsible.

 

[davewhite04]

it does not matter if it was in context, or not, its scripture.

This was probably the thought process of the two sociopaths that killed this guy. And they were wrong on all accounts.

And, no, I'm not going to repeat what I have comprehensively explained.

Dave

 

[davewhite04]

What im trying to establish is that god let these words be written and claimed as his, he knew this would happen before christ did anything, he knew what the words would be and how they would be interpreted and used, so he therefore agrees with all that is in the book and they are his words, many christians deny this and claim that it is not to be taken literally, when at no point does it state they arnt to be taken literally.

Again some do some dont, the confusion is due to the wording of the book, which is gods words and he knew exactly how people would interpret them, meaning he is responsible.

Hello Lemming3k,

As I have explained, God was teaching the Levit's in the time of Mose's. Christians should follow the teachings of Christ, not teachings that were not intended for them. Do you see? Should Christians disregard the words of God in the passages discussed? No, as it gives us an understanding of what a particular sin is in his eyes, so we learn about God.

When Christians claim that this is not meant to be taken literally, they are correct in a sense, as we are in no position to judge sinners, the Levit priests were it seems.

The confusion is due to a lack of understanding of what Jesus taught.

Dave

 

[stretched]

Yo Dave,

Quote davewhite04,
"As I have explained, God was teaching the Levit's in the time of Mose's. Christians should follow the teachings of Christ, not teachings that were not intended for them. Do you see? Should Christians disregard the words of God in the passages discussed? No, as it gives us an understanding of what a particular sin is in his eyes, so we learn about God.

When Christians claim that this is not meant to be taken literally, they are correct in a sense, as we are in no position to judge sinners, the Levit priests were it seems.

The confusion is due to a lack of understanding of what Jesus taught."

Some questions:

1. Is the Bible the eternal, inerrant word of God?
2. Regarding the Bible, how does one seperate the literal, from the non literal?
3. Why is there confusion regarding what Jesus taught?
4. What exactly did Jesus teach?

Allcare.

 

[Lemming3k]

As I have explained, God was teaching the Levit's in the time of Mose's. Christians should follow the teachings of Christ, not teachings that were not intended for them. Do you see?

Christians base their beliefs on the writings and teachings in the bible and believe them to be the truth from god, if the bible are his words then christians should not ignore them, regardless of what they say or who they were intended for, also god is supposedly all knowing, and would have known this confusion would happen so why was the bible not able to avoid this?

 

[Silas]

In the Bible it does not say "Kill Gays". It says that men that lie with men should be put to death - presumably after due process. Like any properly designated (in its day) legal document, it assumes the rule of law, not the rule of the mob.

What was said is true, the one foolish line in that little parable is the concept of God saying "If I didn't want you to such-and-such I would have made it impossible."

Why not replace the word ski with pedophilia?

Why not replace the word ski with wife bashing?

Why not replace the word ski with torturer?

Why not replace the word ski with alcoholism?

Why not replace the Word ski with thrill killing?

Lets leave alcoholism out of it for the moment, but the others are all clearly acts which hurt other people. I'm fascinated as to your justification for regarding homosexuality as a sin (because it says so in the bible) by likening it to a series of violent acts all of which we can agree are among the very vilest of behaviours, but not one of which is specifically prohibited in the Bible.

I think the vast majority of people around the world prefer to take their morality in an absolute sense from what is clearly harmful to other people, as opposed to acts between consenting adults that some people happen to regard as disgusting.

Why do we (in the West) pride ourselves on our democracy? Why do we have democracy? Because the fundamental understanding of society is that everything changes, environments change, society changes, and that laws have to change to reflect that. The problem with following strictly to the nostrums of a 2,500 year old book (if we talk about Leviticus) is that the great majority of Jews, Christians and Muslims are not a semi-nomadic, agricultural people living in broadly desert country without the benefits or disbenefits of technology, good or bad.

5 When brothers live together and one of them dies and has no son, the wife of the deceased shall not be married outside the family to a strange man. Her husband's brother shall go in to her and take her to himself as wife and perform the duty of a husband's brother to her.
6 It shall be that the firstborn whom she bears shall assume the name of his dead brother, so that his name will not be blotted out from Israel.
7 But if the man does not desire to take his brother's wife, then his brother's wife shall go up to the gate to the elders and say, 'My husband's brother refuses to establish a name for his brother in Israel; he is not willing to perform the duty of a husband's brother to me.'
8 Then the elders of his city shall summon him and speak to him. And if he persists and says, 'I do not desire to take her,'
9 then his brother's wife shall come to him in the sight of the elders, and pull his sandal off his foot and spit in his face; and she shall declare, 'Thus it is done to the man who does not build up his brother's house.'

A law that was clearly written "post hoc". In other words, one day this sequence of events took place (including the shoe handling) and later it was codified as a law exactly as it happened. Can anybody tell me really if this whole farrago took place even once after the book of Leviticus was written down? This is one of the areas that if you were to believe that every word of the Bible was the undistilled word of God, you'd say that he was a remarkably foolish and pettyfogging deity.

 

[Lemming3k]

In the Bible it does not say "Kill Gays". It says that men that lie with men should be put to death

Isnt that what gay is?

presumably after due process.

Thats your assumption and opinion of it, it nowhere states that.

 

[davewhite04]

Yo Stretched!

1. Is the Bible the eternal, inerrant word of God?

I'll let the Bible speak for itself on this one.

2 Timothy 3
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

2. Regarding the Bible, how does one seperate the literal, from the non literal?

This is a good question. Books like the apocalyptic ones (Daniel, Revelations etc) I do not take literally, they are more symbolic as they contain visions and such for future events. The rest I take literally but do understand that my interpretation is not perfect as I’m not perfect. A good site which covers this area in more detail is http://www.carm.org/bible/interpret.htm if you’re interested.

3. Why is there confusion regarding what Jesus taught?

I think there are many reasons for this, but I do feel that everyone has their own agenda and this can effect whether or not they understand what Jesus taught with any clarity.

4. What exactly did Jesus teach?

Well I have written the passages that he taught which are relevant to part of the OP question, I would write them again but they are but just a few posts up. If you want to learn more I’d recommend reading Mark’s gospel first (shortest) and then Luke’s.

Dave

 

[davewhite04]

Hello Lemming3k,

Christians base their beliefs on the writings and teachings in the bible

There seemingly is Christians whose belief actually incorporates words written to Levit priests, these need to learn or be taught about context sensitive passages, like the one we are talking about. Jesus warned us not to judge others. So from Leviticus 20:13 we know God's thoughts on the matter of homosexuality, but we are not to judge people who are homosexual as Jesus taught us this.

and believe them to be the truth from god,

They are correct here.

if the bible are his words then christians should not ignore them, regardless of what they say or who they were intended for,

Who said we do ignore them?

also god is supposedly all knowing, and would have known this confusion would happen so why was the bible not able to avoid this?

Man is not perfect, but in Christ we can become closer to perfection. So to be in Christ we need to follow what he said first.

Dave

 

[Lemming3k]

Man is not perfect, but in Christ we can become closer to perfection. So to be in Christ we need to follow what he said first.

It was a reference not about man, god knew how the bible would be written, what it would say, and how every individual man would react to it, so why did it happen the way it has? Why did god allow all his words to be taken however people pleased and divide people more than unite them?

 

[Godless]

*Man is not perfect, but in Christ we can become closer to perfection. So to be in Christ we need to follow what he said first.*

Christ was not perfect! He was the ultimate terror of man. Theres' no perfection in alturism which is exactly what christ was an alturist. Anyhow Jesus was a no-one till some sob's 100-300 years latters wrote about him as some sort of messiah. The Jews still don't recognise your jesus as a messiah, neither do muslims.

Prophecies to Identify the Messiah, Which Jesus Does Not Fulfill:

1) Matthew 1:23 says that Jesus (the messiah) would be called Immanuel, which means "God with us." Yet no one, not even his parents, call him Immanuel at any point in the bible.

2) The Messiah must be a physical descendant of David (Romans 1:3 & Acts 2:30). Yet, how could Jesus meet this requirement since his genealogies in Matthew 1 and Luke 3 show he descended from David through Joseph, who was not his natural father because of the Virgin Birth. Hence, this prophecy could not have been fulfilled.

3) Isaiah 7:16 seems to say that before Jesus had reached the age of maturity, both of the Jewish countries would be destroyed. Yet there is no mention of this prophecy being fulfilled in the New Testament with the coming of Jesus, hence this is another Messiah prophecy not fulfilled.

Nough said;

Godless.

 

[Silas]

In the Bible it does not say "Kill Gays". It says that men that lie with men should be put to death

Isnt that what gay is?

presumably after due process.

Thats your assumption and opinion of it, it nowhere states that.

"Put to death" means legitimately killed by law, not murder. Otherwise every sin listed as punishable by death would be in conflict with the 6th Commandment. And the reason I said that the Bible does not say "Kill Gays" but says put to death men that lie with men, is that I was trying to point out, without directly saying so, that the Bible says nothing about women that lie with women.

I'm actually kind of trying to highlight the hypocrisy of people who indulge their appalling homophobic views with the excuse that "It's a sin. It says so in the Bible." This goes double for people who go further than whoever it was posted higher up the thread that it says "Kill Gays" in the Bible and don't merely state it on an internet forum, but actually go out and do it. And so they go out, find someone who they believe to be homosexual and severely beat them up or actually kill them, solely for the reason that they are disgusted by one or two acts that they believe all homosexuals indulge in, despite the fact that they themselves have never been and will never be invited to participate in such acts nor even to have to witness them. And the fact that such acts are committed in private between consenting adults and that nobody else is harmed simply doesn't enter into their views.

 

[Silas]

*Man is not perfect, but in Christ we can become closer to perfection. So to be in Christ we need to follow what he said first.*

Christ was not perfect! He was the ultimate terror of man. Theres' no perfection in altruism which is exactly what christ was an altruist. Anyhow Jesus was a no-one till some sob's 100-300 years latters wrote about him as some sort of messiah. The Jews still don't recognise your jesus as a messiah, neither do muslims.

Well, duh! Christianity is based on Jesus the Christ! That is what differentiates it from other religions - so obviously they aren't going to believe the same thing. It is the multiplicity of religions in this world, and their mutual incompatibility which is the strongest argument for the non-existance of any God.

Prophecies to Identify the Messiah, Which Jesus Does Not Fulfill:

[...]

2) The Messiah must be a physical descendant of David (Romans 1:3 & Acts 2:30). Yet, how could Jesus meet this requirement since his genealogies in Matthew 1 and Luke 3 show he descended from David through Joseph, who was not his natural father because of the Virgin Birth. Hence, this prophecy could not have been fulfilled.

It goes further than that, really. The genealogies in Matthew 1 and Luke 3 are different to each other from David onwards. One has the Christ descended through Solomon (the son of Bathsheba) and the other has him descended through Nathan (the son of a different wife or concubine, but I can't remember who.) But of course, Jesus bar-Joseph could not possibly be a descendent of David since he was a Galilean, not a Judaean. The idea that the Roman census would require people to travel back to their town of origin to register is certainly fiction. In addition there is no detail in either Nativity account (Christ's Nativity is only mentioned in Matthew and Luke) which is mentioned in the other.

 

[davewhite04]

Why did god allow all his words to be taken however people pleased

Free Will.

Dave