As It Was In The Days Of Sodom...

[Brennin]

There is no verse condemning a "homosexual act" where the Bible would not condemn exactly the same act were one of the participants the opposite sex, with the possible exception of rape.

That is false.

Leviticus 18:22
You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

This is reaffirmed in the New Testament.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

That is false.

Leviticus 18:22
You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

This is reaffirmed in the New Testament.

a. Your translation of Leviticus is flawed, the specific passage refers to temple prostitution homosexual acts among heterosexuals, not all homosexuality per se...
b. as Christians, we are released from blind legalistic observation of Leviticus under the new covenant. Same as we no longer have to worry about how we cut our hair, or showing our mouldy curtains to priests anymore.

 

[Brennin]

a. Your translation of Leviticus is flawed, the specific passage refers to temple prostitution homosexual acts among heterosexuals, not all homosexuality per se...
b. as Christians, we are released from blind legalistic observation of Leviticus under the new covenant. Same as we no longer have to worry about how we cut our hair, or showing our mouldy curtains to priests anymore.

My translation is not flawed. You do not know the languages involved, that much is apparent, so you are in no position to make such a claim. (A claim which is, as it turns out, completely false.)

 

[EnemyPartyII]

My translation is not flawed. You do not know the languages involved, that much is apparent, so you are in no position to make such a claim. (A claim which is, as it turns out, completely false.)

I know how much research I've done. I have no idea how much you've done. Given your refusal to produce any supporting evidence for your contentions, I'll just assume that my research is superior to yours.

 

[Dogbean]

I'm beginning to get tired of the homosexual ping pong.

Gay asks for evidence that God condemns homosexuality.

Christian cites ample evidence from the Bible.

Gay doesn't like what it says, so makes up reasons the Bible is "flawed" or "not really God's Word," or "incorrectly translated," or whatever, even though they like passages saying to love everyone and do kind things.

Christian asserts that the Bible is God's inspired Word, citing evidence for the same.

Gay rejects that as well, knowing that if they concede the Bible is God's Word, then they are accountable for their sin.

Cycle repeats.

Round and round we go.....

 

[Brennin]

I know how much research I've done. I have no idea how much you've done. Given your refusal to produce any supporting evidence for your contentions, I'll just assume that my research is superior to yours.

I produce evidence all the time. Your research consists solely of reading pro-gay "Christian" web sites. As I said, you do not know the languages involved and you are thus in no position to advance such a claim. (Which is transparently false.)

 

[Brennin]

I'm beginning to get tired of the homosexual ping pong.

Gay asks for evidence that God condemns homosexuality.

Christian cites ample evidence from the Bible.

Gay doesn't like what it says, so makes up reasons the Bible is "flawed" or "not really God's Word," or "incorrectly translated," or whatever, even though they like passages saying to love everyone and do kind things.

Christian asserts that the Bible is God's inspired Word, citing evidence for the same.

Gay rejects that as well, knowing that if they concede the Bible is God's Word, then they are accountable for their sin.

Cycle repeats.

Round and round we go.....

Or they pretend that you've never answered them and proceed to cut-and-paste the same discredited tripe ad nauseam.

 

[Dogbean]

Or they pretend that you've never answered them and proceed to cut-and-paste the same discredited tripe ad nauseam.

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that trick.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

I produce evidence all the time. Your research consists solely of reading pro-gay "Christian" web sites. As I said, you do not know the languages involved and you are thus in no position to advance such a claim. (Which is transparently false.)

Unfortunately, disagreeing with your logically unsupported position does NOT make a researched and footnoted disection "transparently false."

 

[EnemyPartyII]

I'm beginning to get tired of the homosexual ping pong.

Gay asks for evidence that God condemns homosexuality.

Christian cites ample evidence from the Bible.

Gay doesn't like what it says, so makes up reasons the Bible is "flawed" or "not really God's Word," or "incorrectly translated," or whatever, even though they like passages saying to love everyone and do kind things.

Christian asserts that the Bible is God's inspired Word, citing evidence for the same.

Gay rejects that as well, knowing that if they concede the Bible is God's Word, then they are accountable for their sin.

Cycle repeats.

Round and round we go.....

Seems like a good reason to stop merely citing the Bible, and looking for some sort of empirical logical basis to back up your claims, huh?

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Or they pretend that you've never answered them and proceed to cut-and-paste the same discredited tripe ad nauseam.

Going for the "Highly polished mirror" award? Or the more venerable "mote in thy brother's eye" commendation?

 

[Brennin]

The following is an excerpt from Philo's On Abraham. Philo is yet another person who knew the scriptures far better than my ideological opponents:

XXVI. (133) And what is signified by this is indicated in a most evident and careful manner by the events which ensued. The country of the Sodomites was a district of the land of Canaan, which the Syrians afterwards called Palestine, a country full of innumerable iniquities, and especially of gluttony and debauchery, and all the great and numerous pleasures of other kinds which have been built up by men as a fortress, on which account it had been already condemned by the Judge of the whole world. (134) And the cause of its excessive and immoderate intemperance was the unlimited abundance of supplies of all kinds which its inhabitants enjoyed. For the land was one with a deep soil, and well watered, and as such produced abundant crops of every kind of fruit every year. And he was a wise man and spoke truly who said--

"The greatest cause of all iniquity

Is found in overmuch prosperity."

(135) As men, being unable to bear discreetly a satiety of these things, get restive like cattle, and become stiff-necked, and discard the laws of nature, pursuing a great and intemperate indulgence of gluttony, and drinking, and unlawful connections; for not only did they go mad after women, and defile the marriage bed of others, but also those who were men lusted after one another, doing unseemly things, and not regarding or respecting their common nature, and though eager for children, they were convicted by having only an abortive offspring; but the conviction produced no advantage, since they were overcome by violent desire; (136) and so, by degrees, the men became accustomed to be treated like women, and in this way engendered among themselves the disease of females, and intolerable evil; for they not only, as to effeminacy and delicacy, became like women in their persons, but they made also their souls most ignoble, corrupting in this way the whole race of man, as far as depended on them. At all events, if the Greeks and barbarians were to have agreed together, and to have adopted the commerce of the citizens of this city, their cities one after another would have become desolate, as if they had been emptied by a pestilence.

XXVII. (137) But God, having taken pity on mankind, as being a Saviour and full of love for mankind, increased, as far as possible, the natural desire of men and women for a connexion together, for the sake of producing children, and detesting the unnatural and unlawful commerce of the people of Sodom, he extinguished it, and destroyed those who were inclined to these things, and that not by any ordinary chastisement, but he inflicted on them an astonishing novelty, and unheard of rarity of vengeance; (138) for, on a sudden, he commanded the sky to become overclouded and to pour forth a mighty shower, not of rain but of fire; and as the flame poured down, with a resistless and unceasing violence, the fields were burnt up, and the meadows, and all the dense groves, and the thick marshes, and the impenetrable thickets; the plain too was consumed, and all the crop of wheat, and of everything else that was sown; and all the trees of the mountain district were burnt up, the trunks and the very roots being consumed. (139) And the folds for the cattle, and the houses of the men, and the walls, and all that was in any building, whether of private or public property, were all burnt. And in one day these populous cities became the tomb of their inhabitants, and the vast edifices of stone and timber became thin dust and ashes. (140) And when the flames had consumed everything that was visible and that existed on the face of the earth, they proceeded to burn even the earth itself, penetrating into its lowest recesses, and destroying all the vivifying powers which existed within it so as to produce a complete and everlasting barrenness, so that it should never again be able to bear fruit, or to put forth any verdure; and to this very day it is scorched up. For the fire of the lightning is what is most difficult to extinguish, and creeps on pervading everything, and smouldering. (141) And a most evident proof of this is to be found in what is seen to this day: for the smoke which is still emitted, and the sulphur which men dig up there, are a proof of the calamity which befell that country; while a most conspicuous proof of the ancient fertility of the land is left in one city, and in the land around it. For the city is very populous, and the land is fertile in grass and in corn, and in every kind of fruit, as a constant evidence of the punishment which was inflicted by the divine will on the rest of the country.

 

[Dogbean]

Seems like a good reason to stop merely citing the Bible, and looking for some sort of empirical logical basis to back up your claims, huh?

Negative, because as long as I am standing on the Bible I'm leaning on God's wisdom which is absolute and trustworthy, and when I step off of that rock, I am leaning on man's wisdom, and man is naturally sinful.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Negative, because as long as I am standing on the Bible I'm leaning on God's wisdom which is absolute and trustworthy, and when I step off of that rock, I am leaning on man's wisdom, and man is naturally sinful.

Indeed, God's wisdome IS absolute... therefore it conforms to logic.

Therefore... if you find a "Biblical" teaching that is illogical, it doesn't come from God.

Or, as always, you are welcome to show me why your interpretation of the Bible is more correct than mine, if you can do so without circular "the Bible is true because the Bible says" logic .

 

[Dogbean]

Indeed, God's wisdome IS absolute... therefore it conforms to logic.

Therefore... if you find a "Biblical" teaching that is illogical, it doesn't come from God.

Or, as always, you are welcome to show me why your interpretation of the Bible is more correct than mine, if you can do so without circular "the Bible is true because the Bible says" logic .

That's like saying "you have to use this gun, without bullets." The Bible IS the Sword of the Spirit, EnemyPartyII, whether you accept it or not. If you ask me to explain why I believe what I believe, but tell me I can't use the rock of my beliefs, that is no different than giving me a gun without bullets. Ludicrous! I gave you my argument; I made my case. You don't accept it because you don't like that it denies your lifestyle. There is nothing more that I can do; God has to do the work now to open your eyes to this truth. It's that simple. I pray that happens. You all (gays) spreading propoganda from pro-gay magazines and websites is not going to change my mind because that is man's wisdom, not God's Word.

I'd like to see your other examples of "illogical teachings" from the Bible; stuff that does not have to do with defending your lifestyle.

 

[KCKID]

I'd like to see your other examples of "illogical teachings" from the Bible; stuff that does not have to do with defending your lifestyle.

Dogbean, I am not 'gay' and my lifestyle (though not perfect) is relatively moral. So, while I disagree with your take on the scriptures in regard to homosexuality I do so without any reason to support some 'gay agenda'. I just don't see God looking down at what is going on in these subforums and being able to say, "Well done thou good and faithful servant."

I realize that that is rhetoric but I feel strongly that Christians need to stop persecuting people whose only (obvious) perceived 'sin' is having a homosexual orientation. I honestly can't see why that would be considered a sin by God or by you. It doesn't stand up to basic logic. Our job is to try to love everyone regardless of how we feel about them. There is absolutely no need to keep tossing those same scriptures of condemnation toward fellow human beings. It's cruel and, I feel confident, would be displeasing to Jesus.

If someone's goal in life is to 'blacklist' a specific group of people with the 'word of God' then something is radically wrong with both 'the word of God' and the messenger. Right or wrong, that's my take on this issue.

 

[Dogbean]

Dogbean, I am not 'gay' and my lifestyle (though not perfect) is relatively moral. So, while I disagree with your take on the scriptures in regard to homosexuality I do so without any reason to support some 'gay agenda'. I just don't see God looking down at what is going on in these subforums and being able to say, "Well done thou good and faithful servant."

I realize that that is rhetoric but I feel strongly that Christians need to stop persecuting people whose only (obvious) perceived 'sin' is having a homosexual orientation. I honestly can't see why that would be considered a sin by God or by you. It doesn't stand up to basic logic. Our job is to try to love everyone regardless of how we feel about them. There is absolutely no need to keep tossing those same scriptures of condemnation toward fellow human beings. It's cruel and, I feel confident, would be displeasing to Jesus.

If someone's goal in life is to 'blacklist' a specific group of people with the 'word of God' then something is radically wrong with both 'the word of God' and the messenger. Right or wrong, that's my take on this issue.

With respect, you think God has to run His rules by you now? It does not have to stand up to logic. It's a perversion of God's design. That's logical enough for me, seeing God's design and man's perversion of it.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

That's like saying "you have to use this gun, without bullets." The Bible IS the Sword of the Spirit, EnemyPartyII, whether you accept it or not. If you ask me to explain why I believe what I believe, but tell me I can't use the rock of my beliefs, that is no different than giving me a gun without bullets. Ludicrous! I gave you my argument; I made my case. You don't accept it because you don't like that it denies your lifestyle. There is nothing more that I can do; God has to do the work now to open your eyes to this truth. It's that simple. I pray that happens. You all (gays) spreading propoganda from pro-gay magazines and websites is not going to change my mind because that is man's wisdom, not God's Word.

I'd like to see your other examples of "illogical teachings" from the Bible; stuff that does not have to do with defending your lifestyle.

My lifestyle is the same as yours... I'm in a long term committed partnership, and I'm in the military. Whats to defend?

But other illogical Bible teachings? Well, theres all that Creation stuff for a start, then there are the contradictions, and the injustices, not to mention the bit that calls for the stoning of rape victims... you want specifics?

And I don't like your similie at all.

From MY perspective, YOU are only using the gun... (being the Bible) without the bullets (being logical meditation and academic study)

 

[EnemyPartyII]

With respect, you think God has to run His rules by you now? It does not have to stand up to logic. It's a perversion of God's design. That's logical enough for me, seeing God's design and man's perversion of it.

Your idea of "God's rules" is wrong.

God didn't make up a set of arbitrary rules and then tell people to follow them... he made rules to guide peoples interactions together... its JUST like secular law... we make laws to streamline social interaction in areas that need clarification, we don't make up laws for no reason and then expect people to blindly follow them for no reason.

God is the same.

The law is made to serve man, not man made to serve the law. Jesus said it, I believe it, and that kind of puts the final nail in blind Biblical legalism for me. so no more of this "why don't you take it up with God" or "God made the rules not me" or "God doesn't need to run the rules past you first" garbage... because GOD HIMSELF (not Moses, or Paul, or any of the other much loved fundie quote mines but Jesus, who is God) said it doesn't work that way.

So, come up with a logical reason to follow your interpretation of Biblical laws, or stop treating them as anything special. Because the Bible does not work as a stand alone inerrant document, and was never intended to be taken as such.

 

[Dogbean]

And I don't like your similie at all.

What "smilie?" And why?