Homosexuality, Immorality and Christianity

[Robban]

End the discussion about gay now before you gays make a fool of yourself

In the year 1608 the swedish king Karl IX was persuaded by the priests into adding "Gods law" as an appendix to the civilian laws.

This resulted in (among other things):

300 innocent women slaugtered for a fairytale-crime

2000 men slaughered for bestiality

At least one man slaughtered for homosexuality (yes it is a rather low figure in this context. In central-europe ne figure was quite a bit higher.

I dont have numbers on adultery.

So.. how did the courts find all the suspects? Well rather simple. The (mostly) priests used "neighborr-turn-ins". In other words the son, wife, neighboor, friend, foe, whoever told a priest.

So how many in here think its a good idea to reestablish "Gods law"? If you dont, then there is no point at all in even discuss those laws.

P.S. By the nature of the laws and punishments in the bible, it is more likely that the ideas comes from the devil instead of God.

 

[Mystech]

Originally posted by truth

32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

So if, in your opinion, it is wrong to disobey the bible (which you apparently view as gods word), and this is what he says, then why are you not out there killing homosexuals as we speak? You’re right it is very clear.

 

[Robban]

How do we know jesus wasnt a black, homosexual woman?

That would really piss the old gang of rasistic, homofobic, womenhating priests off.

 

[Raithere]

Originally posted by truth
Second, just because men change and want to make, unmake religion to suit or justify themselves, does not make it right. Unless God says it is okay, it is not. Who are men to change what God has decreed?

The problem is in the interpretation of the text not the alteration of the text. Certain 'rules' are no longer followed, generally because of changes in our understanding of the world. The prohibitions against pork and sex during menstruation, for instance, make sense within their historical perspective but not today. Whether you like it or not change has occurred and will continue to occur. Ignoring the historical setting in which the various books of the Bible were written only causes confusion and misunderstanding.

I love how people claim that those who do not approve of homosexuality are labeled as bigots. I do not like adultery, does that mean that I am bigoted against adulterers? Garbage.

Bigotry depends upon your actions. Presently in the U.S. adulterers are not subjected to violence and outspoken condemnation. If a priest commits adultery or theft he is not generally defrocked or cast out of the church. The Bible is being used as an excuse for bigotry and hatred of homosexuals.

I can't lose, unless I am doing something contrary to God's will.

If only Christians would put more faith in Jesus's words than Paul's: "Do not judge, and you will not be judged; and do not condemn, and you will not be condemned; pardon, and you will be pardoned." It is not your part to approve or disapprove, to judge or condemn; is it?

And for those who dislike Christ and His teachings, well, it is so terrible to have something that teaches right and wrong.

Please then do show us what Christ's thoughts were regarding homosexuality.

~Raithere

 

[Jenyar]

Originally posted by Mystech
So if, in your opinion, it is wrong to disobey the bible (which you apparently view as gods word), and this is what he says, then why are you not out there killing homosexuals as we speak? You’re right it is very clear.

All sins are "worthy of death" - but we are not in any authority to pass the sentence. The commandment holds: thou shalt not kill.

"Observe the Sabbath, because it is holy to you. Anyone who desecrates it must be put to death" (Ex.31).

I doubt that even Orthodox Jews enforce above law. We see two things here: the Bible commands that we be kept holy, and leaves no question about the severity of sin, but it prohibits us from exacting the punishment.

Homosexuality might have been associated with immorality in those times. That is no longer necessary. We know that homosexual adultery is no worse than heterosexual adultery.

From our side, we must obey the laws as far as our willpower permits us, while accepting that we are guilty of sin and in need of God's forgiveness. In the end you will be judged according to your morality (since this is a moral law). This is the same morality that will show whether you did God's will or not.

 

[everneo]

Originally posted by Raithere
Please then do show us what Christ's thoughts were regarding homosexuality.

He did not comment on incest, bestiality and all other possible acts of immorality as per OT. Did he approve of them.?!

 

[Raithere]

Originally posted by everneo
He did not comment on incest, bestiality and all other possible acts of immorality as per OT. Did he approve of them.?!

We don't know, do we? This is exactly my point.

Truth quoted Romans to us, which was written by Paul not spoken by Jesus. My opinion of Pauline doctrine is rather low even from a Christian view but regardless of that Paul's words are not those of an infallible deity are they? In any case my previous point still stands; Jesus did not give man the right of judgment, he was rather specific about that.

~Raithere

 

[everneo]

Originally posted by Raithere
We don't know, do we? This is exactly my point.

If you mean that we don't know whether He approved of those acts then i can ask what sort of sinners Jesus tried to resque from if he approved of those acts.? As you said "Jesus did not give man the right of judgment, he was rather specific about that." but He reserved the right of judgement and that is the reason for His call to those to come back to the righteous path.

 

[Angelus]

Originally posted by Red Devil
No Sir, I do not condone violence against anyone for reasons outside of war.

Why do you make an exception for war? Do goverments have some kind of holy right that makes their decision to kill someone more "right" than an individuals?

 

[Raithere]

Originally posted by everneo
what sort of sinners Jesus tried to resque from if he approved of those acts?

All of us. It doesn't matter whether homosexuality is a sin or not. None of us are worthy. Why then does homosexuality get singled out so often? Where does any Church merit the right to act in judgment when Jesus himself refused to do so?

John 8:10 - 11
Straightening up, Jesus said to her, "Woman, where are they? Did no one condemn you?" She said, "No one, Lord." And Jesus said, "I do not condemn you, either. Go. From now on sin no more."

~Raithere

 

[everneo]

yes He said 'sin no more'. means repent that & not justify that.

 

[Raithere]

Originally posted by everneo
yes He said 'sin no more'. means repent that & not justify that.

And what business of yours would that be?

~Raithere