Homosexuality

[walloffire]

> Gay people have children all the time.

Gay people can't have children. Children require a sperm and an egg. Biology 101. Gay people can't have children with each other.

see also page 34.

 

[walloffire]

Biblical literalism is a MINORITY belief among Christians.

Mat 7:14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

Not all of those who claim to be Christians are saved.

Mat 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Which is inclusive of believing every word that has come from the mouth of God.

Mat 22:14 For many are called, but few are chosen.

God has children. All of his children believe his scriptures, eat Jesus' body, and drink his blood.

Joh 6:65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
Joh 6:66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.

Joh 6:54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
Joh 6:55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
Joh 6:56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.
Joh 6:57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Mat 7:14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

Not all of those who claim to be Christians are saved.

Mat 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Which is inclusive of believing every word that has come from the mouth of God.

Mat 22:14 For many are called, but few are chosen.

God has children. All of his children believe his scriptures, eat Jesus' body, and drink his blood.

Joh 6:65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
Joh 6:66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.

Joh 6:54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
Joh 6:55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
Joh 6:56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.
Joh 6:57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.

yeah... those sure were some pretty scriptures... shame they were totally irrelevant.

Now... if you can find one that says "to be a Christian you must believe the Bible is inerrant..."?

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

I have higher hopes for mankind than that. Down the Biblical literalist road lie crusades and inquisitions. God gave us rational enquiring minds that we might make the world a better place. It is a sin not to use them.

And anyway, Bblical literalism fails on so many levels. Talking snakes? Global floods? I mean come ON!

Do you like it when people cluster homosexuals all in one group? I don't think you do, so why are you doing it with biblical literalism? Do you believe that God cannot make a snake talk? Or even think that whether He did or not is besides the point, as there is a much deeper underlying point to it all?

Your unbelief is fueling your fire, my friend.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Do you like it when people cluster homosexuals all in one group? I don't think you do, so why are you doing it with biblical literalism? Do you believe that God cannot make a snake talk? Or even think that whether He did or not is besides the point, as there is a much deeper underlying point to it all?

Your unbelief is fueling your fire, my friend.

Um... well, all homosexuals have certain charecteristics... just as all Biblical literalists do.

Anyone who believes the Bible is literally accurate history believes in talking snakes and global floods.

Sure, God COULD have made either of these occur... I just don't see anything other than the Bible to suggest he did.

Find me a snake fossil with a developed broca's imprint in the brain case? find me a geologically uniform flood level?

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

Um... well, all homosexuals have certain charecteristics... just as all Biblical literalists do.

Not really, not all homosexuals commit homosexual action, and not all biblical literalists believe the earth was created in 6 24 hour days.

Anyone who believes the Bible is literally accurate history believes in talking snakes and global floods.

The bible is a history book, try the history between man and God.

Sure, God COULD have made either of these occur... I just don't see anything other than the Bible to suggest he did.

If you approach every scripture with disbelief, what leads you to believe that Christ died and was ressurrected? And that through Him is your path to glory?

Find me a snake fossil with a developed broca's imprint in the brain case? find me a geologically uniform flood level?

I don't have one, then again, I haven't felt a need to look.

I'm going to say it again, your disbelief fuels your fire.
Forgive me for being frank.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Ohioprof,

Christian churches in the United States began serious debates over the question of Biblical inerrancy in the 19th century, after Darwinism created a crisis in the faith. Darwinian theory challenged the churches, because Darwin's theory did not confirm the literal truth of scripture. The result was a broad 3-part division among Christians. One group, the group whose thinking was most nearly consistent with my own thinking today, rejected the truth of the Bible altogether. Another group responded by saying that Darwinism was simply bad science and it was wrong. This is the group that launched the fundamentalist movement in the early 20th century, declaring that to be a Christian, one had to agree with certain "fundamentals." These included the inerrancy of scripture, the virgin birth, the truth of all Biblical miracles, the resurrection, and Christ's substitutionary atonement for human sin. Thus was born what we commonly call Christian fundamentalism. The third group of Christians continued to embrace the Bible as the word of God, but they conceded that the Bible is not literally true or inerrant, and they said that the Bible points to higher moral truths and is not a literally accurate description of events on earth or an accurate description of earthly history. This group argued that science and faith address different kinds of questions, and the Bible is to be interpreted for its moral messages, not taken whole or literally. Out of this group emerged support for the German Higher Biblical Criticism, and this group came to form what many would call liberal or mainstream Christianity. So for at least the past 100 years in the United States, Christians who disbelieved in the inerrancy of the Bible have formed two major groups within Christianity. The third group, the fundamentalist group, tends to regard the other two groups as not truly Christian, because they do not adhere to the "fundamentals" that fundamentalists say are necessary to being a true Christian. Those "fundamentals" include a belief in Biblical inerrancy.

No as I said I dont think you recognise Christian churches.

 

[walloffire]

Now... if you can find one that says "to be a Christian you must believe the Bible is inerrant..."?

Psa 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

-> no errors left after 7 times purification by God.

Joh 10:35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

-> LORD Jesus has power to safeguard his scriptures and protect them from error.

And yes, they were some pretty scriptures, weren't they?
Here's another pretty one just for you.

Oba 1:15 For the day of the LORD is near upon all the heathen: as thou hast done, it shall be done unto thee: thy reward shall return upon thine own head.

 

[Floatingaxe]

Psa 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

-> no errors left after 7 times purification by God.

Joh 10:35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

-> LORD Jesus has power to safeguard his scriptures and protect them from error.

And yes, they were some pretty scriptures, weren't they?
Here's another pretty one just for you.

Oba 1:15 For the day of the LORD is near upon all the heathen: as thou hast done, it shall be done unto thee: thy reward shall return upon thine own head.

Excellent!

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Not really, not all homosexuals commit homosexual action, and not all biblical literalists believe the earth was created in 6 24 hour days.

Well then they arent really a Biblical literalist then, are they... if you believe any part of the Bible is a metaphore, you aren't a literalist... QED

The bible is a history book, try the history between man and God.

No problem there. So why try to force it to do service as a biology/geology/cosmology/astronomy/hydrology/et al textbook whgen, as you so correctly surmise, it isn't?

If you approach every scripture with disbelief, what leads you to believe that Christ died and was ressurrected? And that through Him is your path to glory?

But I don't approach every scriture with disbelief, I approach them with an open mind. There is a subtle, yet significant, difference.

I don't have one, then again, I haven't felt a need to look.

I'm going to say it again, your disbelief fuels your fire.
Forgive me for being frank.

My disbelief fuels my fire... you mean, I should ignore the scientific evidence and just take things on faith, even though they are clearly at odds with observable reality?

You really think thats what God wants us to do?

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

Well then they arent really a Biblical literalist then, are they... if you believe any part of the Bible is a metaphore, you aren't a literalist...

If thats true, then one cannot identify themselves as a true homosexual unless they approve of all types of homosexual intercourse, including pedopheliac ones.

No problem there. So why try to force it to do service as a biology/geology/cosmology/astronomy/hydrology/et al textbook whgen, as you so correctly surmise, it isn't?

As I've already gathered, it seems you've missed the ultimate point and truth that is lined throughout the pages of the bible.

But I don't approach every scriture with disbelief, I approach them with an open mind. There is a subtle, yet significant, difference.My disbelief fuels my fire... you mean, I should ignore the scientific evidence and just take things on faith, even though they are clearly at odds with observable reality?

Your disbelief fuels your fire as in, you are using whatever loops you can in this gigantic book to make its words any less believable, because possibly you disagree with some of what it says. Or whatever reason you do this, I still have not seen any proof that would cause me not to take God's word for exactly that.

You really think thats what God wants us to do?

God wants us to have faith in Him, do you know the definition of faith? It's not a show and tell.

 

[artybloke]

The bible is a history book, try the history between man and God.

No it isn't. It contains history, as well as poetry, parables, myths, legends, prophecy, apocalyptic, epistle, wisdom, contemplation, prayer and legal stuff for the regulation of ancient Hebrew society.

If the Bible were merely a history book, it would be as pointless for us to live by it as supposing that a history of the Roman Empire would be a great help with British foreign policy.

If you approach every scripture with disbelief,

Come on, you know better than this. There's a very big difference between assuming that the Bible itself is wrong, and that one particular (conservative or liberal) interpretation of it is wrong. Approaching the Bible in the spirit of enquiry is surely better than assuming you know what it's going to say before you approach it, isn't it?

 

[EnemyPartyII]

If thats true, then one cannot identify themselves as a true homosexual unless they approve of all types of homosexual intercourse, including pedopheliac ones.

What? thats a total non sequitor... and an offensive one at that.

Biblicl literalists believe the whole Bible is lityerally correct... therefore... if you believe any part of the Bible is metaphorical, you aren't a Bible literalist. End of discussion.

As I've already gathered, it seems you've missed the ultimate point and truth that is lined throughout the pages of the bible.

No, I don't think so. The ultimate truth in the Bible is God's love for us, the chance opf our salvation, and the exhortation to treat each other with love.

The ultimate truth of the Bible is NOT about a literal 7 days of creation, talking snakes, and the need to stone rape victims and homosexuals to death.

Your disbelief fuels your fire as in, you are using whatever loops you can in this gigantic book to make its words any less believable, because possibly you disagree with some of what it says. Or whatever reason you do this, I still have not seen any proof that would cause me not to take God's word for exactly that.

Snakes don't talk.

God wants us to have faith in Him, do you know the definition of faith? It's not a show and tell.

Yes, God DOES want us to have faith in him. However, I don't believe he would make a universe that appears to every possible means of scrutiny yet known, to be a 15 billion year old universe of imense cosmic proportions, when it is infact a 6 thousandish year old bubble of space time centred directly on us at the middle.

Why would God create a universe that looks 15 billion years old, with a zillion tonnes of evidence for evolution, if they aren't actually the way he made the dern thing?

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

What? thats a total non sequitor... and an offensive one at that.

Biblicl literalists believe the whole Bible is lityerally correct... therefore... if you believe any part of the Bible is metaphorical, you aren't a Bible literalist. End of discussion.No, I don't think so.

So what is a proper definition in your terms?

The ultimate truth in the Bible is God's love for us, the chance opf our salvation, and the exhortation to treat each other with love.

You can't have the good without taking the bad, God is love, mercy, grace, but He is also named jealous and He does not tolerate sin.

The ultimate truth of the Bible is NOT about a literal 7 days of creation, talking snakes, and the need to stone rape victims and homosexuals to death.

So you believe that the stoning of homosexuals didn't happen then? Not that its justified in any way in comparison to our more civilized society, I still believe that alot of the social laws and judgements took place.

Snakes don't talk.Yes, God DOES want us to have faith in him. However, I don't believe he would make a universe that appears to every possible means of scrutiny yet known, to be a 15 billion year old universe of imense cosmic proportions, when it is infact a 6 thousandish year old bubble of space time centred directly on us at the middle.

Snakes don't talk, normally. The earth is not 6000 years old and theres not some huge conspiracy covering that up lol.
So what leads you to disbelieve that God could make a snake talk, (assuming the text wasn't figurative), and still believe that a man could be born of a virgin, live a sin free life, and then die and be ressurrected? And furthermore be our ticket to salvation. How is that any more believable?

Why would God create a universe that looks 15 billion years old, with a zillion tonnes of evidence for evolution, if they aren't actually the way he made the dern thing?

I'm with you for the most part on this, but i don't find any biblical contradiction to this theory either.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

So what is a proper definition in your terms?

How about one that is logically self consistent... like "Biblical literalist: believes the Bible literally"

You can't have the good without taking the bad, God is love, mercy, grace, but He is also named jealous and He does not tolerate sin.

Jelousy is a negative trait. God is perfect. Therefore, God is not jealous.

So you believe that the stoning of homosexuals didn't happen then? Not that its justified in any way in comparison to our more civilized society, I still believe that alot of the social laws and judgements took place.

No, I believe it DID take place... rape victims too... and thats rather my point... Just because the Bible says something is lawful and just, doesn't make it so... E.G. stonings

Snakes don't talk, normally. The earth is not 6000 years old and theres not some huge conspiracy covering that up lol.
So what leads you to disbelieve that God could make a snake talk, (assuming the text wasn't figurative), and still believe that a man could be born of a virgin, live a sin free life, and then die and be ressurrected? And furthermore be our ticket to salvation. How is that any more believable?

lets hold on a second here... we're starting to declare some bits figurative now?

I'm with you for the most part on this, but i don't find any biblical contradiction to this theory either.

Um... 7 days... the Bible says the Earth was made in 7 days... that contradicts the 15 billion year age of the ubniverse theory right there

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

How about one that is logically self consistent... like "Biblical literalist: believes the Bible literally"

How about something more defining like 'believes the bible/doesn't believe the bible"

Jelousy is a negative trait. God is perfect. Therefore, God is not jealous.

Once again, not sure which bible you read but God has many traits, just no sin. God has jealousy, and most definitely anger.

No, I believe it DID take place... rape victims too... and thats rather my point... Just because the Bible says something is lawful and just, doesn't make it so... E.G. stonings

Would be nice to take it into historical context, but God forbid we make any sense of it

lets hold on a second here... we're starting to declare some bits figurative now?Um... 7 days... the Bible says the Earth was made in 7 days... that contradicts the 15 billion year age of the ubniverse theory right there

It was 6 days, but as we already know, a day to a human is like a blink of an eye to God.
gen1:16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars.17 God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness.

This tells me that the normal order of earth rotation etc was not even in place until this day, so how were the other days counted as 24 hour periods when the earth wasn't even properly rotating yet?

 

[EnemyPartyII]

How about something more defining like 'believes the bible/doesn't believe the bible"

False dichotomy.... it is possible to believe the Bible, while considering parts of it metaphorical

Once again, not sure which bible you read but God has many traits, just no sin. God has jealousy, and most definitely anger.

So you don't think God is perfect?

Would be nice to take it into historical context, but God forbid we make any sense of it

Lets certainly take it in historical context... thats what I'm TRYING to get you to see... that just MAYBE... if stoning rape victims isn't something we need to do anymore, then perhaps condemning homosexuals is something we don't need to do anymore... see where I'm going yet?

This tells me that the normal order of earth rotation etc was not even in place until this day, so how were the other days counted as 24 hour periods when the earth wasn't even properly rotating yet?

You tell me... YOU'RE the one trying to push the "no contradictions in the Bible" barrow
I'm just stranding here politely

 

[Ohioprof]

> Gay people have children all the time.

Gay people can't have children. Children require a sperm and an egg. Biology 101. Gay people can't have children with each other.

see also page 34.

Gay people most certainly can and do have children. Being gay does not destroy someone's reproductive system. It's true that a same-sex couple cannot get pregnant and bear a child through intercourse with each other. Many heterosexual couples cannot do that either. But there are other ways to have children. Many gay people are parents, and many same-sex couples raise children together.

I have a child. She is still sleeping, and there is no school today, so she can sleep in.

 

[Ohioprof]

So what is a proper definition in your terms?
You can't have the good without taking the bad, God is love, mercy, grace, but He is also named jealous and He does not tolerate sin.

So you believe that the stoning of homosexuals didn't happen then? Not that its justified in any way in comparison to our more civilized society, I still believe that alot of the social laws and judgements took place.

Snakes don't talk, normally. The earth is not 6000 years old and theres not some huge conspiracy covering that up lol.
So what leads you to disbelieve that God could make a snake talk, (assuming the text wasn't figurative), and still believe that a man could be born of a virgin, live a sin free life, and then die and be ressurrected? And furthermore be our ticket to salvation. How is that any more believable?


I'm with you for the most part on this, but i don't find any biblical contradiction to this theory either.

It's silly to believe that God made a snake talk. That never happened. Neither did a virgin birth of Jesus, or a literal resurrection of Jesus. None of these events occurred in real life; they are just stories.

A virgin birth could happen today, because we know how to impregnate someone without sexual intercourse ever taking place.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Ohioprof,

It's silly to believe that God made a snake talk. That never happened. Neither did a virgin birth of Jesus, or a literal resurrection of Jesus. None of these events occurred in real life; they are just stories.

A virgin birth could happen today, because we know how to impregnate someone without sexual intercourse ever taking place.

God created the heaven and the earth and the snake, of course He can make a snake talk.. your god is really unimpressive. What can your god do?