General > General Discussion
Barack Obama Supports Same-Sex Marriage
pecan:
--- Quote from: kaliman2006 on May 23, 2012, 02:15:38 PM ---
--- Quote from: pecan on May 23, 2012, 01:23:37 PM ---Enough of quoting Leviticus to 'prove' that God said homosexuality is a sin.
Leviticus also stared a bunch of other 'behaviors' that were deemed unacceptable but people today chose to ignore. For example:
"'Do not cut your bodies for the dead or put tattoo marks on yourselves. I am the LORD."
Enough
Re: lesbianism
Back then, women were property and for man's use. So lesbianism was not a big deal (I speculate). Plus the Bible was written by men, not God.
If God had written the bible, Moses would not have been able to call all dem stone tablets across the dessert. Now, if he had an Ipad, that might have made it easier.
--- End quote ---
Good point on the hypocrisy of those who seek to condemn homosexuality and not people who get tattoos. You are also right that, in many cases, men, influenced by their own agendas, wrote the bible and not Yahwah.
However, here are my rebuttals to your points. On the issue of tattoos, just because people choose to ignore what is written about them does not invalidate what is written in scripture. The failure of people to make a big deal about it may be more down to human failings than to the failings of what is written n Scripture. An analogy would be people who ignore doctors and eat unhealthy foods, often to their own detriment, but yet condemn alcoholics and drug users. There is a lot of hypocrisy there.
Which of course ties me to my second rebuttal. If I am to understand your argument, because the bible was written by men, then it is debatable what the Eternal Creator really meant. To get a clue of the true feelings of the Almighty on the matter, let us look at the natural consequences of homosexual unions. Can a healthy man and a man or woman and a woman procreate without artificial means (i.e. in vitro fertilization)? Can a healthy man and a woman procreate without artificial means (Assuming that the man is not sterile and the woman is not infertile)? We both know the answer to these questions.
Outside of the bible, which can be misinterpreted, is a natural law. The laws of biology provide for procreation between a man and a woman, not a man and a man. A homosexual couple who is looking to have a child would have to either adopt, or one of the partners would have to go the in vitro route (which involves a male sperm fertilizing a female egg).
The laws of science are indisputable on this point. Even allowing for in vitro fertilization, there still has to be some form of male-female sexual interaction (i.e. male sperm and female egg at the minimum) in order for life to be created.
Now if you want to counter that sex is not always for procreation, then that is another matter altogether. However, bear in mind, if that were the case and everyone decided to stop having sex to procreate, then humanity will eventually become extinct.
--- End quote ---
this debate has been repeated Ad infinitum, however, a couple of quick points (well three actually) ...
1) if people want to up hold the words of scripture as verbatim, then those people should also speak out about the other infractions of the bible. Strangely, they are silent - see my earlier posts regarding the treatment of women as prescribed in the bible.
2) if marriage is about procreation, then what about heterosexual unions that do not produce children? is the love between an infertile couple, or a couple that chose not to have children, or older adults who cannot bear children, any less that those couples with children. Any less that a same sex couple? "Natural Law" creates many instances in which many hetero unions cannot produce off-spring. Or are these cases not really natural law, but aberrations? Are we to condemn them the same way same sex unions are condemned?
3) The world's population just surpassed 7 BILLION. AND most of that came within the last 100 years!!!
Do you really think that the propagation of the human race is at risk due to same sex unions?
In the past, people use the Bible to justify slavery. Thank God that was over turned.
Preacher:
--- Quote from: Bakes on May 23, 2012, 01:38:03 PM ---
--- Quote from: Preacher on May 21, 2012, 11:21:13 PM ---Because of what I've seen in nature, backed up by scripture, I believe scripture is God's Word to men. The only place left for anyone who wants to argue with the scripture on the matter is to not believe in God at all.
--- End quote ---
So if we doh agree with you that "scripture is God's Word to men"... then that mean we doh believe in God? We cyah disagree with yuh that scripture is God's absolute and verbatim word, despite the many influences of man on said scripture?
Okay... lol
--- End quote ---
Nah I ain't trying to broad brush nuttin. :) There are influences in scripture which obviously have had human interpretation to it. However, the ones I've found doesn't change the big idea of the story. For example;
Psalms 8:4-5
What is man, that you are mindful of him? and the son of man, that you visit him?
For you have made him a little lower than the angels, and have crowned him with glory and honor
Now OT is Hebrew...that word 'angels' is not in the original manuscript. The word in the original manuscript is Elohim(Hebrew) So the verse actually means that God has made men a little lower than Himself. That would put men higher than angels. Now this gives great understanding to the power God gave to men and what happens when we pray. If you love to study the word that's a piece of stake. :) But it doesn't change the big idea of the verse nor the message of the writing. God is greater than men and extents His love to them.
Now Bakes I've come across many mistranslated words but I've never come across a completely new big idea on any topic. Concerning Old Testament references to homosexuality the big idea is solid. Mind you, it's smack in the middle of laws that modern society would never condone. Fair enough, but to me it doesn't change the big idea. God wants people to live righteously. Ok, you shouldn't stone your children for disobeying you. Does that make obeying your parents obsolete? I don't believe anything can change the big idea concerning homosexuality. All I'm saying is for that to happen you'll have to change your view of the bible, which as you see many people have different views anyway.
Bakes:
--- Quote from: kaliman2006 on May 23, 2012, 02:15:38 PM ---Which of course ties me to my second rebuttal. If I am to understand your argument, because the bible was written by men, then it is debatable what the Eternal Creator really meant. To get a clue of the true feelings of the Almighty on the matter, let us look at the natural consequences of homosexual unions. Can a healthy man and a man or woman and a woman procreate without artificial means (i.e. in vitro fertilization)? Can a healthy man and a woman procreate without artificial means (Assuming that the man is not sterile and the woman is not infertile)? We both know the answer to these questions.
Outside of the bible, which can be misinterpreted, is a natural law. The laws of biology provide for procreation between a man and a woman, not a man and a man. A homosexual couple who is looking to have a child would have to either adopt, or one of the partners would have to go the in vitro route (which involves a male sperm fertilizing a female egg).
The laws of science are indisputable on this point. Even allowing for in vitro fertilization, there still has to be some form of male-female sexual interaction (i.e. male sperm and female egg at the minimum) in order for life to be created.
Now if you want to counter that sex is not always for procreation, then that is another matter altogether. However, bear in mind, if that were the case and everyone decided to stop having sex to procreate, then humanity will eventually become extinct.
--- End quote ---
Without a doubt personal biases crept into the writings of men like the Apostle Paul. As critical as I am of him (and his unbridled misogyny and prudery, I still acknowledge him as the greatest and most influential Christian writer... we all have our failings. The bible thumpers want to act like God himself set pen to paper in writing the bible. It's the Catholic church who at the Council of Trent, decided to vote on which books made it into the canon, and which books were excluded. For all we know, there are books out there that contain words attributed to Christ that are not so critical of homosexuality. But we don't know b/c the good Catholic Bishops voted them out.
Proverbs 3:5 says "Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding"... this is what we are supposed to do in order to decipher divine intent, turn to God for guidance as we read and interpret the Word. but nah, some want to interpret what they read literally and often in a manner that suits their agenda. I take the bible as a guide, nothing else. A great deal of what I read I take with a grain of salt... not that I disregard it as false, but rather I read it critically. For many Christians that is blasphemy... which is nonsense.
Football supporter:
I'm not particularly good with Christianity and scriptures, and I don't have the depth of knowledge to withstand a heated argument on the subject, but there are the Gnostic Gospels which are supposedly the gospels rejected by the Catholic Church as they didn't fit the story they wanted to tell. I believe there are stories of a "secret" Mark gospel which (if you wish to interpret the writing in such a way) suggests a young guy was in love with Jesus and that they slept under the same roof (of course, some people literally said Jesus had a gay affair with the youth)
I must admit to being a NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) concerning homosexuality. I don't see a problem with it as long as I don't have to witness it (and I don't mean the sex!) Although, of course, I think lesbianism is the 8th wonder of the world!
To me, I can understand the church being upset, but in the 21st Century, I think toleration is called for.
And I find it strange that supposedly heterosexual men who have sex with other males (i.e. prisoners, English Public Schoolboys, Armed services personnel, paedophiles) are usually the loudest voices against homosexuality.
dinho:
When allyuh could find a verse or book in the Bible, in an apocryphal book, in a dead sea scroll or any other writing that merited consideration for inclusion into the Bible that in any way alludes to God radically changed his views on homosexuality and same sex unions.... Then by all means please lemme know.
Cause ah find all these kinda false-positive arguments allyuh coming with to suggest that because something not explicitly prohibited in the Bible mean that it could be somehow acceptable to be real lacking. By that kinda reasoning, we could basically apply that to anything not explicitly prohibited in the New Testament and cast a big wide net and say that pretty much anything goes.
Also on a side note, what does the Koran have to say on the issue and have their ever been same sex marriages conducted under muslim rites?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version