ASIDE from apparent Biblical injunctions...

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]Of what possible relevance is this list:

A. Anyway
B. PARTICULARLY in a thread that is supposed to be about NON BIBLICAL reasoning?[/SIZE]

You might try actually reading my posts before responding. Were you to do that you might see how my list relates to the post I quoted.

B. I could care less. I see this as just an attempt to control the discussion by limiting response to something homosexuals think they can control.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

B. I could care less. I see this as just an attempt to control the discussion by limiting response to something homosexuals think they can control.

TRANSLATION: I have no reason beyond my particular interpretation of the Bible for condemning homosexuality. I can come up with no objective, logical reason to consider anything about it "wrong".

 

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]TRANSLATION: I have no reason beyond my particular interpretation of the Bible for condemning homosexuality. I can come up with no objective, logical reason to consider anything about it "wrong".[/SIZE]

You think I care what you "come up " with?

And stuff you psychobabble "translation." You don't pretend to tell me what I think and I won't try to tell you why you do/think what you do.

And this response says tons about any objectivity a/o integrity on your part. I have posted considerable credible, verifiable historical evidence for my beliefs. And in support of your beliefs; assumptions, presumptions, and biases.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

I won't try to tell you why you do/think what you do.

Except you have repeatedly, and I'm sure will continue to do so.

I have posted considerable credible, verifiable historical evidence for my beliefs

Aside from the Bible and religiously derived scholarship?

If this is the case, I apologise unreservedly, however i can honestly say that most of what I have seen you post seems to be semantics about specific verbiology within specific translations of religious texts. Please, if you have any non-scriptural reasons to consider homosexuality as any more "wrong" than heterosexuality, I would be very interested to see it.

 

[PinkTulip]

Enemy I have posted numerous times about the other religions that do not support homosexuality (Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, Islam, Judaism) and you have never responded. Christianity is not the only bad guy!

About your "empirical evidence" statement, I find it funny that you are putting your faith in science, which is based on assumptions and theories by humans. You are putting your faith in humanity. Take a look at the world around you - do you really want to put your faith in that?

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Enemy I have posted numerous times about the other religions that do not support homosexuality (Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, Islam, Judaism) and you have never responded. Christianity is not the only bad guy!

Allow me to respond now then... in THIS thread... I am interested in reasons from first principals to consider there to be something wriong with homosexuality, rather than regarding it as wong because someone or something to which you ascribe authority condems it...

About your "empirical evidence" statement, I find it funny that you are putting your faith in science, which is based on assumptions and theories by humans. You are putting your faith in humanity. Take a look at the world around you - do you really want to put your faith in that?

To tie this comment to the one above...

I believe it is possible from first principals, to derive morality using logic. Indeed, I utterly believe that there is a logical reason behind every instruction in the Bible.

We can deduce these, objectively and dispasionately, through a simple cost benefit analysis...

So, without looking to any religious text for guidance...

Is murder "wrong"?

Yes. Why?
-personal guilt and trauma
-Removes a productive member of the community
-Causes deep upset and grief among family and friends of victim
-causes resentment and division within community
-possibility of retaliation can harm or kill other members of the community

So all in all, we can see that on the whole, there is a net cost to murder, and hence, there is a directive against it, and thus, it is considered immoral.

Now, it is my contention that, if homosexuality is TRULY immoral, within a modern Western context, that a similar cost benefit analysis should demonstrate this, without having to apeal to the authority of the Bible, or the Vedas, or the Sutras, r the sacred Tablets of The Great Green Eyed Little Yellow God, or anything else.

See my point?

Simply:

Can we deduce murder is immoral without the Bible? Yes
Theft? Yes. Rape? Yes. Adultery? Yes.

Homosexuality?

Well I am unable to, and I invite you or anyone else to try please.

 

[Der Alte]

Except you have repeatedly, and I'm sure will continue to do so.Aside from the Bible and religiously derived scholarship?

Must be your conscience on fire with guilt, assuming you have one. Were you to actually read my posts I have confined my responses almost exclusively to historical exegesis of scripture, in particular; Lev 18:22, 20:13, Rom 1:26-27, 1 Tim 1:10, 1 Cor 6:9.

To my knowledge I have never told you or any other homosexual what to think or do.

If this is the case, I apologise unreservedly, however i can honestly say that most of what I have seen you post seems to be semantics about specific verbiology within specific translations of religious texts. Please, if you have any non-scriptural reasons to consider homosexuality as any more "wrong" than heterosexuality, I would be very interested to see it.

This is Christian Forums NOT Philosophy 101. I am not interested in the latest, new age, if it feels good do it philosophy to justify what God condemns.

"semantics "verbiology" No, how the ancient temple/synagogue/church interpreted and applied scripture is called scholarship. God's Word does not change with every passing fancy.

 

[PinkTulip]

Is murder "wrong"?

Yes. Why?
-personal guilt and trauma
-Removes a productive member of the community
-Causes deep upset and grief among family and friends of victim
-causes resentment and division within community
-possibility of retaliation can harm or kill other members of the community quote]

You can you say the same thing about homosexuality - people feel guilty, can remove a productive member of society due to illness, causes deep upset if the family were against it, causes division, and people have gotten killed over it.

 

[david_x]

Homosexuality is wrong because:
-it destroys healthy relationships
-perverts marrige
-without repentence it is worse than murder because it will send someone to hell
-it is an abomination
-hurts the individual

 

[Divinah]

Yes,its wrong... its unnatural. That is why even they struggle with it... and I do not believe it is because of predisposed social reasons, altogether. I don't think homosexuals dispute the unnaturalness of it...only that even it its unnaturalness, its okay...by whatever reasoning they may conjure up.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

You can you say the same thing about homosexuality - people feel guilty, can remove a productive member of society due to illness, causes deep upset if the family were against it, causes division, and people have gotten killed over it.

Oh come now Tulip, surely you know how flimsy this reasoning is...

Homosexuality... why do people feel guilty about it? Because of the condemnation they recieve from society, not an inherent guilt at the act, unlike murder, which can cause guilt and trauma purely due to the event, without social implication...

can remove a productive member of society due to illness,

As discussed elsewhere, hiomosexuality is no more likely to result in illness than a myriad of other activities... including heterosexuality. Indee, to follow this logic to its reasonable conclusion, lesbianism is MORE moral than heterosexuality, as heterosexual contact is far more likely to resuklt in disease transmission than lesbian contact

causes deep upset if the family were against it,

Right. So its the anti-homosexual sentiment that causes the upset, not homosexuality itself... which makes the anti HS sentiment thew bad guy here...

causes division

Nope... anti homosexual sentiment again is the problem, homosexuality, per ce, does not cause division.

and people have gotten killed over it.

Um, yes... people have been killed over lots of things. That doesn't make the root issue for the violence the bad thing though, necesarily.

All the "problems" you cite relating to homosexuality are based purely on bigotry and misunderstanding... So I'd say it is the bigotry and misunderstanding that is sinful, not the homosexuality.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Divinah... homosexuals rarely struggle with their homosexuality... what they struggle with is the problems they encounter from society.

Oh, and yeah, homosexuals most certaionly DO dispute the idea that there is anything unnatural about homosexuality... and a good many heterosexuals agree with us.

Homosexuality is no more "unnatural" than left handedness

 

[PinkTulip]

Oh come now Tulip, surely you know how flimsy this reasoning is...

Homosexuality... why do people feel guilty about it? Because of the condemnation they recieve from society, not an inherent guilt at the act, unlike murder, which can cause guilt and trauma purely due to the event, without social implication...

You can't speak for all homosexuals. Many people might feel guilty over the act.

As discussed elsewhere, hiomosexuality is no more likely to result in illness than a myriad of other activities... including heterosexuality. Indee, to follow this logic to its reasonable conclusion, lesbianism is MORE moral than heterosexuality, as heterosexual contact is far more likely to resuklt in disease transmission than lesbian contactRight.

It is a fact that homosexuals are the largest population in the US to be carrying the HIV virus, whether you like it or not. I can agree with the lesbian statement.

So its the anti-homosexual sentiment that causes the upset, not homosexuality itself... which makes the anti HS sentiment thew bad guy here...Nope... anti homosexual sentiment again is the problem, homosexuality, per ce, does not cause division.

Again, you can't speak for all homosexuals. If every person were to agree with homosexuality the problems you state might not go away. Many people might feel betrayed by their "orientation".

All the "problems" you cite relating to homosexuality are based purely on bigotry and misunderstanding... So I'd say it is the bigotry and misunderstanding that is sinful, not the homosexuality.

Bigot? Misunderstanding? Considering I probably have a little more understanding of social issues than you, I do not think I am misunderstanding the issue of homosexuality. It is obvious that you do not know my stance, which I have repeated over and over. What I disagree with is the acceptance of sexual sin in this world. If I am going to accept Jesus as my savior, I cannot pick and choose parts of His word to satisfy my own lifestyle, morals and values. Christianity is not a salad bar (pick and choose what you want).

Furthermore, if one is a Christian, our opinions, thoughts and feelings DO NOT MATTER. It is God's Word, not Human's Word.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Considering I probably have a little more understanding of social issues than you,

Indeed? and the logic underlying this statement is...?

If I am going to accept Jesus as my savior, I cannot pick and choose parts of His word to satisfy my own lifestyle, morals and values.

Indeed not. So if you show me chapter and verse where Jesus condemns homosexuality, I'll renounce it immediately

Furthermore, if one is a Christian, our opinions, thoughts and feelings DO NOT MATTER. It is God's Word, not Human's Word.

I disagree. I don't believe that God sets up arbitrary rules that serve no logical or knowable purpose in our blindly following them.

Yes, God DID give us the Bible as a guide to how to live life... but he ALSO gave us our logical and rational minds to make decisions for ourselves based on the best available evidence... If He didn't trust us to make our own self determining decisions, and get it right most of the time, he wouldn't have given us the ability.

 

[PinkTulip]

So if you show me chapter and verse where Jesus condemns homosexuality, I'll renounce it immediately.

Do you believe in the trinity? If you do, you believe that Jesus gave the Law. [SIZE=+0] The Holy Spirit was present at the Jerusalem Council when it was stated that the Gentiles should abstain from sexual sin as defined by the Law. Acts 15[/SIZE]

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Do you believe in the trinity? If you do, you believe that Jesus gave the Law. [SIZE=+0]The Holy Spirit was present at the Jerusalem Council when it was stated that the Gentiles should abstain from sexual sin as defined by the Law. Acts 15[/SIZE]

Riiight... so... does that mean you can't actually provide chapter and verse where Jesus condemns homosexuality?

Bump

Quote:

Considering I probably have a little more understanding of social issues than you,

Indeed? and the logic underlying this statement is...?

 

[PinkTulip]

Riiight... so... does that mean you can't actually provide chapter and verse where Jesus condemns homosexuality?

Bump

I was only referring to the fact that I have studied social policies probably longer than you (considering I am an old lady)

Do you believe in the trinity? You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is an abomination. Leviticus 18:22

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Do you believe in the trinity? You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is an abomination. Leviticus 18:22

Yres, I believe in the Trinity...

However, if you are trying to tell me that the person of Jesus dictated Leviticus... then why did Jesus incarnate recind bits of it? Doesn't that seem to be an example of him contradicting himself?

Or, could it be that the Bible is infact only a spiritually INSPIRED guide, written by humans, and subject to human error, mistranslation, bias, agenda, and contextual shift?

 

[PinkTulip]

Yres, I believe in the Trinity...

However, if you are trying to tell me that the person of Jesus dictated Leviticus... then why did Jesus incarnate recind bits of it? Doesn't that seem to be an example of him contradicting himself?

Or, could it be that the Bible is infact only a spiritually INSPIRED guide, written by humans, and subject to human error, mistranslation, bias, agenda, and contextual shift?

Putting all other parts of it aside because that is for another thread, Jesus never renounced sexual sin (look at the prostitute). Sexual sin was also denounced by the Holy Spirit in Acts 15 when they were discussing the very issue we always talk about - should the Gentiles live by the Law?

 

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]Yres, I believe in the Trinity...

However, if you are trying to tell me that the person of Jesus dictated Leviticus... then why did Jesus incarnate recind bits of it? Doesn't that seem to be an example of him contradicting himself?

Or, could it be that the Bible is infact only a spiritually INSPIRED guide, written by humans, and subject to human error, mistranslation, bias, agenda, and contextual shift?[/SIZE]

No! Were one to actually read the Bible, rather than only selected out-of-context proof texts, one would know, for example,

Gal 3:22-28
(22) But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
(23) But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
(24) Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
(25) But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.
(26) For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
(27) For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
(28) There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Rom 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.

Col 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.
​

As for so-called "human error, mistranslation bias, agenda, and contextual shift" that is a cop-out used by all false beliefs. But we have the original languages, we don't have to rely on translations. For example, 1948 the Qumran/Dead Sea scrolls were discovered, in Israel. Q/DSS provided us with manuscripts of the O.T., dating to 100 BC. We now know that we have the same O.T. that Jesus used in Israel during his lifetime. No mistranslations! No changes! No corruptions! God preserved his word exactly as he said he would.

NT, we have about 23,000 manuscripts and it has been estimated that almost all of the N.T. could be reconstructed from citations in the early church fathers.

Isa 55:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.​

If, as you claim, "the Bible is infact only a spiritually INSPIRED guide, written by humans", we might as well toss it out and use the Quran, the Bhagavadghita, etc.