Pope Francis backs same-sex civil unions

coffee4u said:

You agree with these positions?
1) That difference races of people are different kinds and shouldn't intermarry
2) That the verse in Genesis is justification for the transatlantic slave trade
3) That people of different languages should not intermarry
4) That the different races should live in different areas.

Because that is what I was denying.

Click to expand...

you can deny it all you want the fact remains that racists have and continue to use the bible as justification of their prejudices.

Nothing in that list was to do with sexual activity.

Click to expand...

why would anything in that list have to do with sexual activity?

Being against sin is not anti anything. Unless you also use the words 'anti-adultery, anti-theft, anti-greed etc.

Click to expand...

but using the bible to justify your own personal prejudices does

God lists sins in various places in the Bible

Click to expand...

and racists have a list like that too.

Yes but it still stands that if you are making a claim that you need something to back it up with.
I am claiming that God's word says any sexual activity outside of marriage is a sin. I back that up with scripture to show where I get that claim from.

Click to expand...

And racists say exactly the same thing. They say God's word shows that racial equality is a sin and they back it up with scripture.

SilverBear said:

And racists say exactly the same thing. They say God's word shows that racial equality is a sin and they back it up with scripture.

Click to expand...

There is no scripture that backs up racism

There is scripture that backs up sexual immorality as being a sin.

Galatians 5:19–21
19 The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
Or are you flat out going to say it doesn't say 'sexual immorality'?

coffee4u said:

There is no scripture that backs up racism

Click to expand...

many disagree

There is scripture that backs up sexual immorality as being a sin.

Click to expand...

which isn't what the thread is about

coffee4u said:

You are the one claiming that people can use the Bible for racial prejudiced, so its up to you to show where and how.

Click to expand...

My recollection was that, while I do not always agree with you, you are not prone to making silly statements. Yet this one crosses the line.
I grant you that assertions normally need to be supported, but such is not the case for something commonly understood to be the case. For example, one would not reasonably ask someone to support the assertion that the sun generally rises in the morning (arctic/antarctic circles not withstanding). I suggest that it is widly recognised that racists routinely used the Bible to justify their position. Are you actually disputing this?

Ophiolite said:

My recollection was that, while I do not always agree with you, you are not prone to making silly statements. Yet this one crosses the line.
I grant you that assertions normally need to be supported, but such is not the case for something commonly understood to be the case. For example, one would not reasonably ask someone to support the assertion that the sun generally rises in the morning (arctic/antarctic circles not withstanding). I suggest that it is widly recognised that racists routinely used the Bible to justify their position. Are you actually disputing this?

Click to expand...

I actually documented it, but I think it is common knowledge that the Bible has been used to support slavery, the inferiority of black people, segregation, unequal treatment of women (and in the case of 1 Tim, their inherent untrustworthiness), rejection of same gender sex, and the denial of the existence of transgenders.

Ophiolite said:

My recollection was that, while I do not always agree with you, you are not prone to making silly statements. Yet this one crosses the line.
I grant you that assertions normally need to be supported, but such is not the case for something commonly understood to be the case. For example, one would not reasonably ask someone to support the assertion that the sun generally rises in the morning (arctic/antarctic circles not withstanding). I suggest that it is widly recognised that racists routinely used the Bible to justify their position. Are you actually disputing this?

Click to expand...

I do know the people used the Bible in such a way, that wasn't my point.

Lets say you wrote a book on something like computer programing. (This is an example I am not saying that you did.) You outline some things and someone grabs a hold of a couple of words and runs off with them in a direction that you never intended and its clear to everyone who actually knows the topic that you intended A-B-C, but this person somehow makes it mean D-E and F. They make a big noise about it and gather people who agree with them. Is it your fault that they misused your work in that way? No. Is the wording of your book supporting them? No. The mistake is on them.

My point was that Just because a group of people wave the Bible around and claim it taught something doesn't mean it actually did.

The racism is on those people alone, not on the Bible. There are also people who claimed science backed up racism. The Nazi's believed that white, preferably blond people were more evolved. Doesn't mean it did or they were. People can make any claim from any book.

coffee4u said:

There is no scripture that backs up racism

Click to expand...

What does the Bible say about slavery? Does it make a distinction between different racial groups?

coffee4u said:

I do know the people used the Bible in such a way, that wasn't my point.

Lets say you wrote a book on something like computer programing. (This is an example I am not saying that you did.) You outline some things and someone grabs a hold of a couple of words and runs off with them in a direction that you never intended and its clear to everyone who actually knows the topic that you intended A-B-C, but this person somehow makes it mean D-E and F. They make a big noise about it and gather people who agree with them. Is it your fault that they misused your work in that way? No. Is the wording of your book supporting them? No. The mistake is on them.

My point was that Just because a group of people wave the Bible around and claim it taught something doesn't mean it actually did.

The racism is on those people alone, not on the Bible. There are also people who claimed science backed up racism. The Nazi's believed that white, preferably blond people were more evolved. Doesn't mean it did or they were. People can make any claim from any book.

Click to expand...

they can also make claims about homosexuality and as you point out that won't make the claims true

coffee4u said:

I do know the people used the Bible in such a way, that wasn't my point.

Lets say you wrote a book on something like computer programing. (This is an example I am not saying that you did.) You outline some things and someone grabs a hold of a couple of words and runs off with them in a direction that you never intended and its clear to everyone who actually knows the topic that you intended A-B-C, but this person somehow makes it mean D-E and F. They make a big noise about it and gather people who agree with them. Is it your fault that they misused your work in that way? No. Is the wording of your book supporting them? No. The mistake is on them.

My point was that Just because a group of people wave the Bible around and claim it taught something doesn't mean it actually did.

The racism is on those people alone, not on the Bible. There are also people who claimed science backed up racism. The Nazi's believed that white, preferably blond people were more evolved. Doesn't mean it did or they were. People can make any claim from any book.

Click to expand...

Neatly explained. However, that is not what you said here:

coffee4u said:

You are the one claiming that people can use the Bible for racial prejudiced, so its up to you to show where and how.

Click to expand...

It seems that was an unnecessary request since you now acknowledge that people have indeed used the Bible to justify racial prejudice.
Forgive me if I come across as patronising, but if you had written with more care it would have saved both of us some time.

SilverBear said:

they can also make claims about homosexuality and as you point out that won't make the claims true

Click to expand...

The Bible says acts of homosexuality are a sin. I gave you that passage as well.
1 Corinthians 6:9-11

9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.

If God says something is sin, then it is sin. It is one sin amongst many. It's not special and they are not special. It doesn't matter if someone is attracted to men or women or both. All unmarried people are called to be celibate. For sure it must be harder for people attracted to the same sex, but they are no different to people who are attracted to the opposite sex. All must remain celibate.

Any sexual sin outside of the marriage union counts as immorality. Immorality is simply the catch phrase for all sexual sin.
Fornication, adultery, same sex acts, rape, inappropriate behavior with animals, polygamy, bigamy, inappropriate content watching,, lusting over someone in your mind, sexual assault, incest , and child molestation all are immorality.

The only sex that is not not immoral is sex inside of marriage and God defined marriage as one women and one man. Even then it can count as immorality if it's rape.

The Ant said:

What does the Bible say about slavery? Does it make a distinction between different racial groups?

Click to expand...

Most times slavery in the Bible was within the same racial group but different tribes. For example the Edomites were another nation, but they were the descendants of Esau, the eldest son Isaac. While the Israelite were descendants of Jacob who was Esue's younger twin brother. Whoever they went to war with was to do with their spiritual state before God, not how they looked. They would take prisoners of war as slaves.

Other times people chose to become a slave to pay off debts. They could go to jail or sell themselves and after 7 years they were to be set free.
Jermiah 34:14
Every seventh year each of you must free any fellow Hebrews who have sold themselves to you.

Ophiolite said:

It seems that was an unnecessary request since you now acknowledge that people have indeed used the Bible to justify racial prejudice.
Forgive me if I come across as patronising, but if you had written with more care it would have saved both of us some time.

Click to expand...

They are making a claim that the Bible teaches racism, I think it's fair that they show where.
They are the ones likening Racism to being against homosexuality, when it's not the same thing at all. Any sexual act outside of marriage is a sin, being white or black or brown, is not.

coffee4u said:

Most times slavery in the Bible was within the same racial group but different tribes. For example the Edomites were another nation, but they were the descendants of Esau, the eldest son Isaac. While the Israelite were descendants of Jacob who was Esue's younger twin brother. Whoever they went to war with was to do with their spiritual state before God, not how they looked. They would take prisoners of war as slaves.

Other times people chose to become a slave to pay off debts. They could go to jail or sell themselves and after 7 years they were to be set free.
Jermiah 34:14
Every seventh year each of you must free any fellow Hebrews who have sold themselves to you.

Click to expand...

Was there not a different law for the treatment of Hebrew slaves, as opposed to the infidels?

coffee4u said:

They are making a claim that the Bible teaches racism, I think it's fair that they show where.
They are the ones likening Racism to being against homosexuality, when it's not the same thing at all. Any sexual act outside of marriage is a sin, being white or black or brown, is not.

Click to expand...

The curse of Ham?

coffee4u said:

The Bible says acts of homosexuality are a sin. I gave you that passage as well.

Click to expand...

racists can and do say the same thing. So what?

coffee4u said:

Most times slavery in the Bible was within the same racial group but different tribes.

Click to expand...

However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. Leviticus 25:44-45

For example the Edomites were another nation, but they were the descendants of Esau, the eldest son Isaac. While the Israelite were descendants of Jacob who was Esue's younger twin brother. Whoever they went to war with was to do with their spiritual state before God, not how they looked. They would take prisoners of war as slaves.

Click to expand...

So they sent twelve thousand warriors to Jabesh-gilead with orders to kill everyone there, including women and children. “This is what you are to do,” they said. “Completely destroy all the males and every woman who is not a virgin.” Judges 21:10

Other times people chose to become a slave to pay off debts. They could go to jail or sell themselves and after 7 years they were to be set free.
Jermiah 34:14
Every seventh year each of you must free any fellow Hebrews who have sold themselves to you.

Click to expand...

When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. Exodus 21:7


If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.’ If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever. Exodus 21:4-6

Well,
Looking at the sheer number of pages and those obsessed with it.

The homosexual promoters are trying so hard to get the acceptance they desire and are failing.

Trying to get the last word in as if that's going to grant them acceptance.
Guess what?

Ain't happening.

* I turn around and walk away from the arguments*

The Ant said:

The curse of Ham?

Click to expand...

What about it?

Read the text over, does it say Ham's descendants will forever more be slaves? No.
Does it indicate some kind of slave trade? No.
Does it even mention that Ham was black and that Shem and Japhet were not or indicate skin colour at all? No.

Even if Ham's skin was darker, the three of them are still brothers.
If you have a family of brothers and one has darker skin you are not going to say "He's black and they are white" Not unless you are very ignorant. You might say "They are mixed"

25 he said,

“Cursed be Canaan!
The lowest of slaves
will he be to his brothers.”


26 He also said,

“Praise be to the Lord, the God of Shem!
May Canaan be the slave of Shem.
27 May God extend Japheth’s territory;
may Japheth live in the tents of Shem,
and may Canaan be the slave of Japheth.”

All it says is that Ham will be the lowest of slaves to his brothers, Shem and Japheth, and that is all it says.
Anything else that someone comes up with is from their own mind. If the text doesn't say it, it isn't the fault of the text but the person with the over active imagination.

SilverBear said:

racists can and do say the same thing. So what?

Click to expand...

Racists have no passages of scripture.

JohnDB said:

Well,
Looking at the sheer number of pages and those obsessed with it.

The homosexual promoters are trying so hard to get the acceptance they desire and are failing.

Trying to get the last word in as if that's going to grant them acceptance.
Guess what?

Ain't happening.

* I turn around and walk away from the arguments*

Click to expand...

Yes, they can't deniy that scripture plainly says it's a sin. Instead they toss up diversion tactics about racism and slaves which have nothing to do with the topic at hand.