The Bible and Homosexuality | Page 4 | Religion Spirituality | Forum

A A A
Avatar

Please consider registering
guest

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —






— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_TopicIcon
The Bible and Homosexuality
August 5, 2012
2:59 am
Avatar
khanster
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 710
Member Since:
September 19, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

We are living in the last days...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaism_an ... he_Midrash

"Rabbi Huna said in the name of Rabbi Joseph, 'The generation of the Flood was not wiped out until they wrote marriage documents for the union of a man to a male or to an animal.'"

http://bible.cc/luke/17-26.htm

"When the Son of Man comes again, the situation will be like the time of Noah."

August 6, 2012
1:18 am
Avatar
frrostedman
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 3815
Member Since:
September 4, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"DIss0n80r" wrote: Yet Jesus himself may have been gay.

That provocative statement is without merit, however just "being gay" is not what is condemned in the bible anyway.

Every one who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe-a spirit vastly superior to that of man. - Albert Einstein

August 6, 2012
1:40 am
Avatar
frrostedman
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 3815
Member Since:
September 4, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"humphreys" wrote: Is it not true that Jesus never mentioned homosexuality? Is it not also true that Leviticus is most often cited by Christians as evidence that homosexuality is wrong? In my experience it is, and that's a double-standard because you must either accept OT or not, you can't pick and choose.

As is often the case, it's what Jesus didn't say about homosexuality that is important. Jesus took the time to address the male-female relationship, and ordained it as a Godly, natural union:

  • "But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female. Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”

If Jesus condoned intimate relationships between homosexuals, that was the time to make it clear. But He didn't. But that's not the clincher. If it was left at just that, then we might have reason to debate. However..

It was St. Paul -- the "disciple to the Gentiles" -- chosen by Christ Himself to instruct us on the teachings of Christ and the context He was using -- who explicitly condemned intimate relationships between homosexuals.

LIke you said, we can't just cherry pick.. right? Neither can anyone else. The New Testament specifically, utterly, and completely condemns intimate relationships between homosexuals.

Leviticus on the other hand--unless one is a practicing Jew--is the Law handed down directly to the Hebrew people for that time, until the Old Covenant was supplanted by the New Covenant.

What you might be confusing are the Commandments. Christians live by them and try not to break them. We've had debates before about the difference between Commandments (for all mankind, of which there are relatively few) and Mosaic Law (for the Hebrews). When Jesus was asked how we should live, He said to live by the Commandments. That's a direct answer to a direct question. He didn't say to live by the Mosaic Law, and in fact said more than once that the Old Covenant Mosaic Laws being superceded by a superior New Covenant.

What Leviticus says about menstruation is universal. We are not talking about laws, we are talking about direct statements from God about women on their period as "unclean", and everything they touch, or go near as "unclean". Men are supposed to stay away from them because they are so unclean.

Leviticus contains Laws that were given to the Hebrew people for them to live by. God was concerned that His chosen people would live and not spread disease (in this case through blood transfer). As you will recall, the Hebrew people were completely isolated... cut off from the rest of the world. The Hebrews were a very tight-knit group and any contagion introduced into the fold would have spread rapidly. Speaking of "cut off," this could easily spin off into a discussion about circumcision and the meaning behind it.

How is that something that is not universal? Did menstruating women suddenly become clean when Jesus died on the cross? Because that makes no sense.

You are using a strawman argument. When Jesus died on the cross, the thing that changed was not the cleanliness of menstruation. The thing that changed is that instead of a relatively small group of chosen people, the entire world was given possibility of salvation. The Gentiles were included instead of being excluded from God's future plans. (of course, it was part of the plan all along, but I digress)

How many Christians sleep in a separate bed from their wives when they have their period? Do you? It seems that the Bible's stance on the matter is quite clear, even if that "law" is not strictly mandatory these days, it should at least be considered good practice.

What is the New Testament's take on this?

Notice also, that God, in all his wisdom, does not instruct women on how to be hygienic, he simply tells men to "stay away", as they are "unclean".

I guess He could have told them to grab a bottle of Massengil, but, whatever. Please recall that the Hebrew people at the time were on the move and living in the desert wilderness. They didn't live in buildings; had no hospitals; no access to contempory healthcare. We are talking about hundreds of thousands of people literally crawling all over each other in one huge, mobile encampment. Being "clean" was of critical importance for their survival.

It seems to me that a heck of a lot of focus is put on homosexuality as opposed to most other things in the OT, and that the NT's rules to simply "love thy neighbour" are seldom followed.

What does "love thy neighbor" have to do with the subject at hand.

Every one who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe-a spirit vastly superior to that of man. - Albert Einstein

August 6, 2012
2:02 am
Avatar
frrostedman
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 3815
Member Since:
September 4, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Hump, you keep mentioning Christians who hold fast to the old, Mosaic Laws. I know many Christians as well, that do the same thing.

They do so in error and it grieves me to say I am repulsed whenever they condemn others using those old Laws.

Every one who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe-a spirit vastly superior to that of man. - Albert Einstein

August 6, 2012
11:21 am
Avatar
humphreys
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2149
Member Since:
August 21, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"frrostedman" wrote: Hump, you keep mentioning Christians who hold fast to the old, Mosaic Laws. I know many Christians as well, that do the same thing.

They do so in error and it grieves me to say I am repulsed whenever they condemn others using those old Laws.

Yes, as I said, Leviticus is often cited in regards to homosexuality, and if Christians want to make a reasoned debate against it they should stop using OT passages.

Would you agree?

As for the passages where you state Jesus' stance on homosexuality was clear by what he didn't say, I don't quite buy that.

For instance, you cite this passage

"But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female. Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”

It would seem to be that if this is used to condemn homosexuality it should also be used to condemn people who choose not to get married at all? Is this not just as much an attack on celibacy, for example, as it is on homosexuality? It seems more of a recommendation to me rather than a direct statement that under no circumstances should two men be together. Also, to me, this seems far more a comment on couples staying together and is primarily an attack on divorce, and not on homosexuality - it's a pretty general statement that people should stay together and not be promiscuous, which, incidentally, is exactly what homosexuals are trying to do by getting married.

"frrostedman" wrote: The New Testament specifically, utterly, and completely condemns intimate relationships between homosexuals.

Hmmm, where?

I don't think you made that clear in your post, did I miss something?

The OT does, but the NT is at least debatable, and a decent argument can be made for it saying nothing clear on the subject, as the article I cited demonstrated.

"frrostedman" wrote: Leviticus contains Laws that were given to the Hebrew people for them to live by. God was concerned that His chosen people would live and not spread disease (in this case through blood transfer).

I would say the comments in Leviticus go way beyond hygiene, it is clear God sees menstruation as a pretty horrid thing. If there is something God so clearly sees as disgusting, perhaps modern Christians should heed God's advice to stay away from menstruating women completely - but they don't.

"frrostedman" wrote: What is the New Testament's take on this?

As far as I know nothing is said. However, something so clearly unclean and awful to God should be respected even if the law changes. OT laws may not apply to us, but God's opinion on the matter is crystal clear - stay away from menstruating women completely because they are unclean.

"frrostedman" wrote: I guess He could have told them to grab a bottle of Massengil, but, whatever.

Or how to create a simple, hygienic tampon?

Let's face it "stay away" is an extremely crude approach to a simple issue of hygiene, and pretty degrading to women.

"frrostedman" wrote: What does "love thy neighbor" have to do with the subject at hand.

If you think your average Christian is not full of a little bit of hatred towards homosexuals I think you are closing your eyes to the truth.

"All of our behavior can be traced to biological events about which we have no conscious knowledge: this has always suggested that free will is an illusion."

- Sam Harris

August 6, 2012
6:05 pm
Avatar
greeney2
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 10314
Member Since:
April 9, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"humphreys" wrote: If you think your average Christian is not full of a little bit of hatred towards homosexuals I think you are closing your eyes to the truth.

But your average Atheist, or homosexual, are not full of hatred twards Christians?

August 6, 2012
7:39 pm
Avatar
humphreys
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2149
Member Since:
August 21, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"greeney2" wrote: [quote="humphreys"]If you think your average Christian is not full of a little bit of hatred towards homosexuals I think you are closing your eyes to the truth.

But your average Atheist, or homosexual, are not full of hatred twards Christians?

Not at all. I have a lot of respect for a lot of Christians on here.

Not you, but that has less to do with your beliefs and more to do with your attitude, and what I feel is certainly not hatred.

"All of our behavior can be traced to biological events about which we have no conscious knowledge: this has always suggested that free will is an illusion."

- Sam Harris

August 6, 2012
8:13 pm
Avatar
greeney2
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 10314
Member Since:
April 9, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Baloney!

August 6, 2012
8:48 pm
Avatar
humphreys
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2149
Member Since:
August 21, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

🙄

"All of our behavior can be traced to biological events about which we have no conscious knowledge: this has always suggested that free will is an illusion."

- Sam Harris

August 7, 2012
1:40 am
Avatar
DIss0n80r
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 4161
Member Since:
April 20, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Yeah, Greene is an embarassment to theists. :thumbdown:

"I can conceive of nothing in religion, science, or philosophy, that is anything more than the proper thing to wear, for a while." ~ Charles Fort

Forum Timezone: America/Los_Angeles

Most Users Ever Online: 288

Currently Online:
63 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

greeney2: 10314

bionic: 9870

Lashmar: 5289

tigger: 4576

rath: 4297

DIss0n80r: 4161

sandra: 3858

frrostedman: 3815

Wing-Zero: 3278

Tairaa: 2842

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 2

Members: 24904

Moderators: 0

Admins: 2

Forum Stats:

Groups: 8

Forums: 31

Topics: 9146

Posts: 124488

Newest Members:

Tea, Calf-Rope, Henry, nburton.com, Traci, Uwe Schneider, Douglas, lordufo, Charles McNair, Mary Blaszak

Administrators: John Greenewald: 642, blackvault: 1776