A re-examination of nothing (2)

[EnemyPartyII]

hahaha, yes we had covered that we were not beholden to the law in that those under grace are no longer subject to it. That doesn't absolve us from turning from sin though, that's the point I'm making.

We are charged to love God with all our being and one another as ourselves. Deliberately continuing in anything that is not consistent with God's holiness is when problems arise.

OK... so... shellfish and mixed fobre clothes? Aren't they just as sinful?

 

[k2svpete]

No, Jesus used Peter as an example of this when he said that nothing he declared clean is unclean.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear EnemyPartyII,

OK... so... shellfish and mixed fobre clothes? Aren't they just as sinful?

Firstly this has been explained to you already, Jesus Chirst fulfills the law and the prophets and Jesus teaches that through Him we need no longer worry about what we eat or wear You say 'just as' sinfull, just as what as same-sex sex? i thought you said the Bible doesnt condemn same-sex sex.

 

[OllieFranz]

Dear OllieFranz,
Once again that is not the purpose of this thread, that is merely showing you the evidence that same-sex sex is a sin. Considering all I would have to say that you don’t believe it. If a man lying with another man instead of a woman is detestable, and men committing indecent lustful acts with other men instead of women is error, and men wanting sex with men is wicked, I would say you simply don’t believe the Biblical evidence.
Of course I believe that, why don’t you?

So are you saying that you don't care what 1 Samuel says about David and Jonathan, because that is "not what this thread is about"?

When you started this thread it was a challenge:

I thought as Genesis 2, Matt 19, Mark 10, Eph 5 all stating God's purpose is man and woman are continually being disputed, it would be good to discuss the 0 verses that countenance same-sex unions.
So where are they?

In response to this challenge some have presented the relationship between Jonathan and David in 1 Samuel. So examining that passage is most definitely what this thread is about.

After examining it you may or may not be able to judge it an inadequate response, but to dismiss the possibility out-of-hand without examining it is a pre-judicial act.

But…

No you are refusing as yours is an assumption, mine is based on the evidence that nothing is mention and such as things was recognised by the OT law and Jewish society as detestable to God. I have the evidence, you don’t, all you have is an assumption I believe is shown to be faulty and you are merely asking me to ignore the evidence and accept your assumption. That would be to also ignore God’s revelation to us.

How is examining the verse "refusing" anything?

What "assumption" is it that you claim I have? You issued the challenge. This was the response. And I was examining the response. The only thing I'm asking you to accept is the responsibility to honestly consider the responses to your own challenge.

I fully agree with exactly what Jet_A_Jockey has said…

…there is no reason to believe that they had any sort of sexual relationship, because there is nothing that points towards it. There is also a lack of correlating evidence elsewhere in scripture that could preclude that a relationship of their depth involved sexual intimacy. David had several wives throughout his life, and to assume he was anything other than heterosexual without any real evidence is a falsehood. Do I know for certain that david never had a gay relationship? Nope, I wasn't there. But from what I've read about him in the bible, I can safely conclude that he did not, based on the information I was given.

​

​

Jet has looked at the passage and, like me, has found the nature of their relationship to be less clear than those who offered it as a response to your challenge implied. He went a step further than I would, and felt that he could decide that it was most likely (but not a certainty) not homoerotic, but it was an honest examination of the passage. You simply dismissed the possibility.

Let me stop you there. My view is based on the evidence I have presented so it isnt prejudged, your assumption is baseless so if anyone has pre-judged it is you.

But the "evidence" you presented said nothing about Jonathan and David. That is like deciding a criminal case without hearing any evidence for or against the defendant.

Ok thanks. So at least you cant offer this story as an example of homosexual practice because you cant be sure either way.

So we are left with nothing to examine that countenances same-sex sex.

So now that you have decided that you can use my conclusion to support your claim in the OP, it suddenly becomes on-topic for this thread again? (Even though you specifically denied that it was in the first paragraph of the same post)

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Olliefranz,

So are you saying that you don't care what 1 Samuel says about David and Jonathan,

My apologies, you are correct, I thought you were referring to the evidence presented which condemns same-sex sex. Misunderstanding.

The only argument put forward from the David and Jonathan story is that they kissed and they loved each other. The writer obviously describes sex as David sleeping with a woman he found attractive naked, that he loved Jonathan and kissed him isn’t in the slightest bit unusual in the Bible anyway. There is no direct reference to David having sex with Jonathan like there is him sleeping with a woman because her nakedness attractive.

Jet has looked at the passage and, like me, has found the nature of their relationship to be less clear than those who offered it as a response to your challenge implied.

Nope I don’t think so, Jet_A_Jockey has said there is nothing that points towards same-sex. One could equally say we cannt be sure that David didn’t warn everyone that same-sex sex is error because we weren’t there, but based on the information given we can safely conclude he did not.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Dear EnemyPartyII,
Firstly this has been explained to you already, Jesus Chirst fulfills the law and the prophets and Jesus teaches that through Him we need no longer worry about what we eat or wear You say 'just as' sinfull, just as what as same-sex sex? i thought you said the Bible doesnt condemn same-sex sex.

I'm still not seeing an explanation for why homosexuality is still condemned when other OT sins are not... lot of fundie tapdancing, but nothing substantial.

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

in comparison to the rest of scriptural relationships, there is no reason to believe they were sexually involved.

The problem with this argument is that the pro-gay side is saying that the evidence that they kissed on the mouth, and loved one another, is evidence that they were romantically involved. However, by doing so, they dismiss the same types of evidence that david was not homosexual. That amount of evidence is much greater, also, so much so that to suggest he was romantically involved with another man is absurd.

 

[BreadAlone]

EXACTLY - and homosexual relationships are NOWHERE condemned in the bible.

Sorry, I'm late again as usual..

But if you want to have a relationship between two people..NOT SEXUAL in ANY WAY..I really don't see any biblical grounds to say necessarily that it's a sin..but it creates all kinds of questions that would need to be addressed.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear EnemyPartyII,

I'm still not seeing an explanation for why homosexuality is still condemned when other OT sins are not... lot of fundie tapdancing, but nothing substantial.

As I said if you cant see Jesus Christ in this you wont be able to. You will be like the Jews and stuck with interpretation of the law. I have already given examples of Levitical laws which through Jesus Christ we are fulfilling such as love ones neighbour and avoid sexual immorality and ones which are fulfilled such as sacrifice, mixed fibres and foods. If you cant see the answer it doesn’t matter how many different questions you keep asking, the answer is the same. I cant really be more helpful than that.

peace

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Dear EnemyPartyII,
As I said if you cant see Jesus Christ in this you wont be able to. You will be like the Jews and stuck with interpretation of the law. I have already given examples of Levitical laws which through Jesus Christ we are fulfilling such as love ones neighbour and avoid sexual immorality and ones which are fulfilled such as sacrifice, mixed fibres and foods. If you cant see the answer it doesn’t matter how many different questions you keep asking, the answer is the same. I cant really be more helpful than that.

peace

I just wish you could come up with a coherent and consistent explanation.

so far all I see is you explaining away why YOUR infractions of OT law are somehow OK, while you feel perfectly happy to condemn mine.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

in comparison to the rest of scriptural relationships, there is no reason to believe they were sexually involved.

The problem with this argument is that the pro-gay side is saying that the evidence that they kissed on the mouth, and loved one another, is evidence that they were romantically involved. However, by doing so, they dismiss the same types of evidence that david was not homosexual. That amount of evidence is much greater, also, so much so that to suggest he was romantically involved with another man is absurd.

Why? Because no man who has had a sexual relationship with a man ever has another sexual relationship with a woman?

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear EnemyPartyII

I just wish you could come up with a coherent and consistent explanation.

I can do better than a dozen Bible passages.

so far all I see is you explaining away why YOUR infractions of OT law are somehow OK, while you feel perfectly happy to condemn mine.

Well you are the one asking the questions and I have shown you what the Bible says as an explanation. I am content with what the Bible says. I cant however see where you stand.
Take for example Leviticus 19:18 'Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD.
19 " 'Keep my decrees.
" 'Do not mate different kinds of animals.
" 'Do not plant your field with two kinds of seed.
" 'Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material.
I see Jesus Christ says to love ones neighbour as oneself Matt 5, and that it doesn’t matter what one wears. Matt 6. (read the whole chapters for the context) How do you see Lev 19:18-19, do you keep both or ignore both?

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

Why? Because no man who has had a sexual relationship with a man ever has another sexual relationship with a woman?

I never said that. I meant that based on the evidence of his past relationships being heterosexual, as well as the flow of the entire scriptural collection of the bible, points at him being heterosexual.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Dear EnemyPartyII
I can do better than a dozen Bible passages.

Well you are the one asking the questions and I have shown you what the Bible says as an explanation. I am content with what the Bible says. I cant however see where you stand.
Take for example Leviticus 19:18 'Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD.
19 " 'Keep my decrees.
" 'Do not mate different kinds of animals.
" 'Do not plant your field with two kinds of seed.
" 'Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material.
I see Jesus Christ says to love ones neighbour as oneself Matt 5, and that it doesn’t matter what one wears. Matt 6. (read the whole chapters for the context) How do you see Lev 19:18-19, do you keep both or ignore both?

Your oft cited Bible passages are neither coherent, nor consistent... hence my problem.

You self evident doublething regarding Leviticus is emblematic

 

[EnemyPartyII]

I never said that. I meant that based on the evidence of his past relationships being heterosexual, as well as the flow of the entire scriptural collection of the bible, points at him being heterosexual.

Well, no, because of his obviouvly homosexual relationship with Jonathon...

You can't say "we know David's relationship with Jonathon was hetero, because all his other relationships were hetero, which is how we know his relationship with Jonathon was hetero"... thats called bootstrapping. Assessing the case of David and Jonathin purely on its own merits, its clear they were romantically involved.

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

Well, no, because of his obviouvly homosexual relationship with Jonathon...

what, pray tell, makes it 'obvious' that they had a homosexual relationship?

You can't say "we know David's relationship with Jonathon was hetero, because all his other relationships were hetero, which is how we know his relationship with Jonathon was hetero"... thats called bootstrapping.

So making educated assumptions based on prior evidence is bootstrapping? I am stating that there is no other biblical assertions that david was anything other than heterosexual, so the premise is partially set. That means you cannot look at it with a completely blank slate, since we have alot of information regarding his life and the life of other israelites during his time.

Assessing the case of David and Jonathin purely on its own merits, its clear they were romantically involved.

Even on its own merits, it is not a certainty that they were engaged in a sexual relationship. There are other instances of men kissing each other on the mouth written in the bible, are they homosexual encounters as well? Do you realize customs have changed drastically throughout cultures and ages?

It's funny that you are asserting to view this as a singular incident, without taking in all the other factors that give structure to the story and help explain why things happened the way they did. Reminds me of some literalists I know

Just pickin

 

[OllieFranz]

On the other hand, the Bible says that David loved Jonathan, but nowhere does it claim that he loved any woman. (Just an observation someone once made and pointed out to me.)

 

[BreadAlone]

On the other hand, the Bible says that David loved Jonathan, but nowhere does it claim that he loved any woman. (Just an observation someone once made and pointed out to me.)

It also says David was a man after God's own heart, and since God clearly called homosexuality an abomination in the OT..

 

[Floatingaxe]

On the other hand, the Bible says that David loved Jonathan, but nowhere does it claim that he loved any woman. (Just an observation someone once made and pointed out to me.)

David loved Abigail. You know it when you read His story, without a shadow of a doubt.

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

On the other hand, the Bible says that David loved Jonathan, but nowhere does it claim that he loved any woman. (Just an observation someone once made and pointed out to me.)

Going from the top of my head, in the OT, women aren't really regarded on the same level as men. There are exceptions, ofc, but for the most part, the men were the center of most stories. That being said, what is more important to readers, david's love for one of his wives, or the prince handing over his right to the throne?

Do you believe that jonathan knew that david was God's anointed?