Leviticus 20:13

rcscwc · #**341** 6th November 2009, 07:25 AM

Originally Posted by LightHorseman

But you still recognise their marriage? Even though they are from a completely non-Christian religion, right?

I disagree. It is precisely about the commitment, and father/daughter cannot get married because mutually informed adult consent can never exist in a parent/child incestuous relationship

And the people involved. Why would God want two people he made homosexual to be unhappy?

Originally Posted by one11

This is a Christian forum. Hindu's are not Christian. Therefore, the point is moot because some people are here to learn Christianity and the Bible, not Hinduism.

Reason why you should not drag Hinduism in your discussions HERE.

Please teach me what your philosophy says about Hindu marriages. Are they invalid or valid, moral or immoral etc?

chingchang · #**342** 6th November 2009, 03:17 PM

Originally Posted by LightHorseman

The gender of the participants isn't whats important in its justification, it is the intended commitment to each other of the participants.

Again, do you call a Hindu married couple "fornicators"? They certainly didn't get married in a Christian religious ceremony. Or is it their commitment to each other that makes the relationship special?

I have come to this conclusion as well. It is the covenant that matters...not the sexual orientation. So many heterosexual couples break their coventant vows...God hates that according to the Bible! I would strongly caution anyone wanting to enter into marriage...

CC

rcorlew · #**343** 7th November 2009, 02:44 AM

Ok, hate to break up a little spat here, but I have not seen anybody (I only read about 20 pages) even mention the fact that, well, sex is a benefit of marriage only!

Originally Posted by 1 Corinthians 7:1 - 6

1 Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: "It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman."
2 But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.
3 The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband.
4 For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.
5 Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
6 Now as a concession, not a command, I say this.

I included verse 6 to demonstrate that this is not merely an opinion as the next passage is, but a command.

So since sex is a benefit of marriage which is strictly described in the Bible between one man and one woman (I know that many will pull the poligomy card but just read how well that worked out for those who tried it) as made evident by the wording of "husband" and "wife" (not plural), to participate in sex falls under the same table of law as theft.

If you do nut understand the "Table of Law" I will give you a brief run down:
The "Table of Law" in Jewish Law is quite simple, all laws applicable to any one area are equal, meaning that any law regarding theft was equal and just as important as another law regarding theft (a person using dishonest scales faced the same penalty as a person who stole a cow). This fact is made abundantly clear by a person asking Jesus what the most important law was because they had to treat them all equally reverently, to which Jesus replied with not one law but two, Love God and love your neighbor as yourself.

When the original 10 Commandments were given to Moses they were on two stone tablets and divided by God. All the laws on the first tablet were laws regarding our love for God, and it was intentionally arranged so that according to Jewish Law all would be viewed as equal to loving God. The same is true for the second tablet which contained the next five commandments all of which were referring to loving our neighbors as ourselves.

According to Genesis 2:24 husband and wife are seen as one flesh by God, and perhaps you don't know that the man who joins his body to a prostitute becomes physically one with her? (1 Corinthians 6:16)

Originally Posted by 1 Thessalonians 4:1-8

1 Finally, then, brothers, we ask and urge you in the Lord Jesus, that as you received from us how you ought to walk and to please God, just as you are doing, that you do so more and more.
2 For you know what instructions we gave you through the Lord Jesus.
3 For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from sexual immorality;
4 that each one of you know how to control his own body in holiness and honor,
5 not in the passion of lust like the Gentiles who do not know God;
6 that no one transgress and wrong his brother in this matter, because the Lord is an avenger in all these things, as we told you beforehand and solemnly warned you.
7 For God has not called us for impurity, but in holiness.
8 Therefore whoever disregards this, disregards not man but God, who gives his Holy Spirit to you.

If Paul is saying there is still a thing called "immorality" after the death and ascension of Christ, then to the OP the answer would undoubtedly have to be YES!

rcscwc · #**344** 12th November 2009, 04:28 AM

Originally Posted by LightHorseman
The gender of the participants isn't whats important in its justification, it is the intended commitment to each other of the participants.

Again, do you call a Hindu married couple "fornicators"? They certainly didn't get married in a Christian religious ceremony. Or is it their commitment to each other that makes the relationship special?

Originally Posted by chingchang

I have come to this conclusion as well. It is the covenant that matters...not the sexual orientation. So many heterosexual couples break their coventant vows...God hates that according to the Bible! I would strongly caution anyone wanting to enter into marriage...

CC

I want to learn. Since your covenants are not recognised by Hindus/Buddhists/Sikhs, do they "break" your covenant? Why? If they do, then are you taught to hate them?

Instruct me.

rcorlew · #**345** 12th November 2009, 10:40 PM

Originally Posted by IAmLegion.

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them."

Yeahhh....this is a tough one.

Modern Christians aren't to eager to bring this one up. What are we saying as a whole now? Seriously, tell me what you think. Is the Pentateuch the "Old" Testament, outdated and (bluntly) insane? Who can find the best glasses for the omnipotent nearsightedness of God?

Nope Old Testament still good and valid.

By the way, why did you choose that screen name?

Are you aware that this is a name that Satan uses for himself?

BigBadWlf · #**346** 13th November 2009, 07:58 AM

Originally Posted by rcorlew

Nope Old Testament still good and valid.

So that means you don’t cut your hair or shave or wear fabrics made of two different materials. And you keep slaves, forcibly impregnate your widowed sister in law, kill disobedient children and make rape victims marry their attacker…or is not all of the old testament still valid?

david_x · #**347** 13th November 2009, 08:31 AM

Originally Posted by BigBadWlf

So that means you don’t cut your hair or shave or wear fabrics made of two different materials. And you keep slaves, forcibly impregnate your widowed sister in law, kill disobedient children and make rape victims marry their attacker…or is not all of the old testament still valid?

If you know an argument is so invalid why do you bring it up?

chingchang · #**348** 13th November 2009, 11:04 AM

Originally Posted by rcscwc

I want to learn. Since your covenants are not recognised by Hindus/Buddhists/Sikhs, do they "break" your covenant? Why? If they do, then are you taught to hate them?

Instruct me.

Christians are not taught to hate anyone...although many Christians seemingly hate homosexuals. You'll see them say "we don't hate the sinner...we hate the sin"...but that doesn't match their actions. When I speak of a covenant...I'm talking about an agreement that two (or more) people enter with each-other bound by a set of rules (vows) and presented to God for sealing. I don't care what the Church thinks...or what it's rules are...I care what God thinks. I don't care if Hindus or whomever...recognize my marriage. My marriage is between me...my wife...and the Most High God.

CC