Homosexuallity is the same as polygamy

[EnemyPartyII]

You are twisting what the bible says. If they are found out THE MAN MUST MARRY/SUPPORT THE VICTIM.

So what am I twisting here... A RAPE VICTIM WOULD NOT WANT TO BE FORCED TO MARRY HER ATTACKER!

ose things aren't considered wrong though.

please PLEASE try to be consistent for a moment...

You said... the Bible does not specifically approve of homosexuality... the inferrence being, that because the Bible doesn't specifically approve of something, it is therefore wrong...

Using that same logic, the Bible does not specifically mention universal suffrage or technology beyond forged iron, so...

IF

Homosexuality is bad because the Bible does not specifically approve of it

why doesn't it follow that

universal suffrage is wrong because the Bible does not specifically approve of it

technology beyond forged iron is wrong because the Bible does not specifically approve of it?

 

[david_x]

So what am I twisting here... A RAPE VICTIM WOULD NOT WANT TO BE FORCED TO MARRY HER ATTACKER!

To be fair the verse doesn't say that the women is forced to marry. (or unwilling in the rape. but that is somthing else all together.)

And again, you don't know that. It was a very different time. The women would never choose anyway.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

or unwilling in the rape. but that is somthing else all together.)

Oh, do PLEASE defend the idea that a woman may be a willing partner with in a rape, oh please do...

And again, you don't know that. It was a very different time.

Hey, you're the one saying ancient homosexual laws are just as relevant today... so you CAN'T say that "oh, it was a very different time" regarding one set of morals, and yet expect a different set of morals to be exactly the same today unless you explain why they should be considered different.

The women would never choose anyway.

explain?

 

[EnemyPartyII]

To be fair the verse doesn't say that the women is forced to marry.

If the rapist is forced to marry the woman... where do you see the woman having a choice in the maytter? How is this different from saying the woman is forced to marry the rapist?

both end up married, despite what either of them want, right?

 

[davedjy]

What makes you believe that leviticus or Paul in Romans are talking about pagan orgies? There is no basis to this claim other than speculation which is useless.

I was going to reason with you on why it is a fallacious argument that would base itself on no condemnation of such relationships in scripture. But why should I bother carrying on about it with you? I know very well that if you are proven wrong on one thing you will go to another. Later, when talking to someone else, you will again return to the same false argument I already exposed for you.

Sorry, but I must decline right now. The fallaciousness of an argument is a small point when morality is based upon ones own self. I'll go invest my energy where it will grow into something.

Cheers.

HISTORICAL context and backings.

Leviticus is proven because it does not have "thou shall not lie with womankind as with mankind". The verse following says neither shall any man lie with any beast or woman lie with any beast. It mentions BOTH sexes, and they are clear that it was a pagan ritual practice where a man would dress as a woman in this pagan ritual practice to a false god.

 

[david_x]

If the rapist is forced to marry the woman... where do you see the woman having a choice in the maytter? How is this different from saying the woman is forced to marry the rapist?

both end up married, despite what either of them want, right?

i don't know were your going with this, women were not as importent as men back then. The women was a scarlet letter if you would.

explain?

Women did not pick their partner (with possibly some exceptions). The husband to be would pay the father for his daughter.

Hey, you're the one saying ancient homosexual laws are just as relevant today... so you CAN'T say that "oh, it was a very different time" regarding one set of morals, and yet expect a different set of morals to be exactly the same today unless you explain why they should be considered different.

Things that were bad stayed wrong. (exception food and Gentiles, not however the Gentiles practices) Many things that were okay became wrong.

 

[davedjy]

i don't know were your going with this, women were not as importent as men back then.

Your point is what w/that? does that make it OK just because of the historical context that women were not equal to men? women are EVERY BIT as equal to men.

 

[david_x]

Your point is what w/that? does that make it OK just because of the historical context that women were not equal to men? women are EVERY BIT as equal to men.

Yes they are but they were not, weaker vessel.

 

[davedjy]

Yes they are but they were not, weaker vessel.

They say if a man was to carry a baby he would pass out. you don't seem to get pain tolerance women can go through.

A weaker vessel??? do you have proof of which you are talking about. Something tells me you don't.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

i don't know were your going with this, women were not as importent as men back then. The women was a scarlet letter if you would.

THIS IS PRECISELY MY POINT! Women WEREN'T considered as important "back then"... WHICH IS AN EXAMPLE OF CHANGEING MORALITY, right?

So IF you accept that women are now considered equal to men, even though in Biblical times they weren't...

Why do you have so much difficulty with the idea of shifting morality in relation to other issues?

 

[davedjy]

THIS IS PRECISELY MY POINT! Women WEREN'T considered as important "back then"... WHICH IS AN EXAMPLE OF CHANGEING MORALITY, right?

So IF you accept that women are now considered equal to men, even though in Biblical times they weren't...

Why do you have so much difficulty with the idea of shifting morality in relation to other issues?

Why ask him that? He won't be able to piece this together.

 

[Full_Moon]

In case some responded to posts of mine and have not gotten a reply from me. Please accept my apologies for any inconvenience. I have ceased keeping up with this thread in favor of targeting the one principle I see as the cause of all this division. You'll know where to find me.

Enjoy the discussion!!

 

[Der Alte]

This has GOT to be the most arrogant, or most naive statement I have ever read, if you are seriously suggesting that rape victims appreciate being forced to marry their assailant. *snip*

What was the alternative? In that culture many marriages were arranged by the parents and neither the bride nor groom had any say in the matter.

 

[Der Alte]

Slavery was legal in the olden days...

So much for historical context being morally acceptable...

Logical fallacy, nothing in the Bible is binding because we can find 1-2 out-of-context verses delineating something repulsive or objectionable.

 

[davedjy]

Logical fallacy, nothing in the Bible is binding because we can find 1-2 out-of-context verses delineating something repulsive or objectionable.

You love to use historical context for your backings, but shall we see how accurate they were "historically speaking"? = that is my logic.

 

[Der Alte]

You have yet to find me an example of a loving, monogamous homosexual relationship condemned. Even Leviticus is talking about a pagan orgy worship ritual, which is a ritual impurity. YOU are cherry picking the law, not me.

Just like the Jews from the time of Moses, "cherry picked" the law. NOT! Who we gonna believe, as to what the OT teaches on this or any subject, the ancient Jews to whom the law was reveled and who actually read and understood Hebrew or a bunch of guys who could not locate a Hebrew verb if their life depended on it and can't tell a hithpael from a hatpin?

Talmud -- Sanhedrin 54a

MISHNAH. HE WHO COMMITS SODOMY WITH A MALE OR A BEAST, AND A WOMAN THAT COMMITS BESTIALITY ARE STONED. . . . Our Rabbis taught: [If a man lieth also with mankind, as the lyings of a woman,29 both of them have committed on abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them,]. . .

Sanhedrin 54b

This teaches the punishment: whence do we derive the formal prohibition? — From the verse, Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination.1 From this we learn the formal prohibition for him who lies [with a male]: whence do we know a formal prohibition for the person who permits himself thus to be abused? — Scripture saith: There shall be no sodomite of the sons of Israel:2 and it is further said, . . .

Now, he who [actively] commits pederasty, and also [passively] permits himself to be thus abused — R. Abbahu said: On R. Ishmael's view, he is liable to two penalties, one [for the injunction] derived from thou shalt not lie with mankind, and the other for [violating the prohibition,] There shall not be a Sodomite of the sons of Israel. . . .

for there shall be no Sodomite applies to sodomy with mankind.13 . . .

He who submits both to pederasty and to bestiality — R. Abbahu said: On R. Akiba's view, he incurs two penalties; one for thou shalt not lie [with mankind], and the other for thou shalt not lie [with any beast]. But on R. Ishmael's view, he incurs only one punishment, both offences being derived from the single verse, There shall be no Sodomite.19 . . .

Jewish Encyclopedia - Dog

- The dog being an unclean animal, "the breaking of a dog's neck," mentioned as a sacrificial rite in Isa. lxvi. 3 (compare Ex. xiii. 13), indicates an ancient Canaanite practise (see W. R. Smith, "Rel. of Sem." p. 273). The shamelessness of the dog in regard to sexual life gave rise to the name ("dog") for the class of priests in the service of Astarte who practised sodomy ("kedeshim," called also by the Greeks κυναίδοι, Deut. xxiii. 19 [A. V. 18]; compare ib. 18 [17] and Rev. xxii. 15; see Driver ad loc.), though as the regular name of priests attached to the temple of Ashtoret at Larnaca has been found on the monuments (see "C. I. S." i., No. 86).

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=415&letter=D&search=sodomy

Jewish Encyclopedia - Chastity

(e) The unnatural crimes against chastity, sodomy and pederasty, prevalent in heathendom, were strictly prohibited (Lev. xviii. 22, 23; xx. 13, 15, 16; Deut. xxvii. 21).

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=386&letter=C&search=sodomy

Jewish Encyclopedia - DIDACHE - Dependence upon Jewish Custom.

A manual of instruction for proselytes, adopted from the Synagogue by early Christianity, and transformed by alteration and amplification into a Church manual.
2: "Thou shalt not commit adultery" (Ex. xx. 14). (This includes: "Thou shalt not commit sodomy nor fornication.") "Thou shalt not steal" (Ex. xx. 15). . . . "Thou shalt not use witchcraft nor practise sorcery" (Ex. xxii. 18; Lev. xix. 26). (This belongs obviously to the eliminated first part comprising the duties toward God.) "Thou shalt not procure abortion, nor shalt thou kill the new-born child" (compare Wisdom xii. 5). (This is the amplification of Ex. xx. 13, and belongs to verse 1.) "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's goods" (Ex. xx. 17; see verse 6).

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=341&letter=D&search=sodomy

Jewish Encyclopedia - Crime

On the analogy of this Biblical case the Rabbis decide several others (see Burglary). In three cases the person on the point of committing a crime may be killed: where he pursues a neighbor in order to kill him; where he pursues a male to commit sodomy; and where he seeks to ravish a betrothed damsel; for Deut. xxii. 27 indicates the duty of all that hear her cry to help her.

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=301&letter=L&search=sodomy

Jewish Encyclopedia - COMMANDMENTS, THE 613: 3347-53.

Adultery, sodomy, etc. Lev. Xviii. 7, 14, 20, 22, 23.

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=689&letter=C&search=sodomy​

 

[davedjy]

Just like the Jews from the time of Moses, "cherry picked" the law. NOT! Who we gonna believe, as to what the OT teaches on this or any subject, the ancient Jews to whom the law was reveled and who actually read and understood Hebrew or a bunch of guys who could not locate a Hebrew verb if their life depended on it and can't tell a hithpael from a hatpin?

Talmud -- Sanhedrin 54a

MISHNAH. HE WHO COMMITS SODOMY WITH A MALE OR A BEAST, AND A WOMAN THAT COMMITS BESTIALITY ARE STONED. . . . Our Rabbis taught: [If a man lieth also with mankind, as the lyings of a woman,29 both of them have committed on abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them,]. . .

Sanhedrin 54b

This teaches the punishment: whence do we derive the formal prohibition? — From the verse, Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination.1 From this we learn the formal prohibition for him who lies [with a male]: whence do we know a formal prohibition for the person who permits himself thus to be abused? — Scripture saith: There shall be no sodomite of the sons of Israel:2 and it is further said, . . .

Now, he who [actively] commits pederasty, and also [passively] permits himself to be thus abused — R. Abbahu said: On R. Ishmael's view, he is liable to two penalties, one [for the injunction] derived from thou shalt not lie with mankind, and the other for [violating the prohibition,] There shall not be a Sodomite of the sons of Israel. . . .

for there shall be no Sodomite applies to sodomy with mankind.13 . . .

He who submits both to pederasty and to bestiality — R. Abbahu said: On R. Akiba's view, he incurs two penalties; one for thou shalt not lie [with mankind], and the other for thou shalt not lie [with any beast]. But on R. Ishmael's view, he incurs only one punishment, both offences being derived from the single verse, There shall be no Sodomite.19 . . .

Jewish Encyclopedia - Dog

- The dog being an unclean animal, "the breaking of a dog's neck," mentioned as a sacrificial rite in Isa. lxvi. 3 (compare Ex. xiii. 13), indicates an ancient Canaanite practise (see W. R. Smith, "Rel. of Sem." p. 273). The shamelessness of the dog in regard to sexual life gave rise to the name ("dog") for the class of priests in the service of Astarte who practised sodomy ("kedeshim," called also by the Greeks κυναίδοι, Deut. xxiii. 19 [A. V. 18]; compare ib. 18 [17] and Rev. xxii. 15; see Driver ad loc.), though as the regular name of priests attached to the temple of Ashtoret at Larnaca has been found on the monuments (see "C. I. S." i., No. 86).

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=415&letter=D&search=sodomy

Jewish Encyclopedia - Chastity

(e) The unnatural crimes against chastity, sodomy and pederasty, prevalent in heathendom, were strictly prohibited (Lev. xviii. 22, 23; xx. 13, 15, 16; Deut. xxvii. 21).

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=386&letter=C&search=sodomy

Jewish Encyclopedia - DIDACHE - Dependence upon Jewish Custom.

A manual of instruction for proselytes, adopted from the Synagogue by early Christianity, and transformed by alteration and amplification into a Church manual.
2: "Thou shalt not commit adultery" (Ex. xx. 14). (This includes: "Thou shalt not commit sodomy nor fornication.") "Thou shalt not steal" (Ex. xx. 15). . . . "Thou shalt not use witchcraft nor practise sorcery" (Ex. xxii. 18; Lev. xix. 26). (This belongs obviously to the eliminated first part comprising the duties toward God.) "Thou shalt not procure abortion, nor shalt thou kill the new-born child" (compare Wisdom xii. 5). (This is the amplification of Ex. xx. 13, and belongs to verse 1.) "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's goods" (Ex. xx. 17; see verse 6).

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=341&letter=D&search=sodomy

Jewish Encyclopedia - Crime

On the analogy of this Biblical case the Rabbis decide several others (see Burglary). In three cases the person on the point of committing a crime may be killed: where he pursues a neighbor in order to kill him; where he pursues a male to commit sodomy; and where he seeks to ravish a betrothed damsel; for Deut. xxii. 27 indicates the duty of all that hear her cry to help her.

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=301&letter=L&search=sodomy

Jewish Encyclopedia - COMMANDMENTS, THE 613: 3347-53.

Adultery, sodomy, etc. Lev. Xviii. 7, 14, 20, 22, 23.

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=689&letter=C&search=sodomy​

There is NO word in the Bible about "sodomy".

You have to relate this back to Scripture!

Show me in the Bible where the act of Sodomy is condemned!

 

[Der Alte]

You love to use historical context for your backings, but shall we see how accurate they were "historically speaking"? = that is my logic.

I will take the Word of God over your *cough cough* logic any day.

 

[davedjy]

There is NO word in the Bible about "sodomy".

You have to relate this back to Scripture!

Show me in the Bible where the act of Sodomy is condemned!

.

 

[Der Alte]

There is NO word in the Bible about "sodomy".

You have to relate this back to Scripture!

Show me in the Bible where the act of Sodomy is condemned!

I just did kemo sabe! See how the ancient Jews since the time of Moses have interpreted the scriptures. You have this irrelevant logical fallacy retort, Show where this is? Show me where that is? You show me where the Bible states clearly and unequivocally that male-male sex is only condemned in a pagan worship setting?

Talmud -- Sanhedrin 54a

MISHNAH. HE WHO COMMITS SODOMY WITH A MALE OR A BEAST, AND A WOMAN THAT COMMITS BESTIALITY ARE STONED. . . . Our Rabbis taught: [If a man lieth also with mankind, as the lyings of a woman,29 both of them have committed on abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them,]. . .

Sanhedrin 54b

This teaches the punishment: whence do we derive the formal prohibition? — From the verse, Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination.1 From this we learn the formal prohibition for him who lies [with a male]: whence do we know a formal prohibition for the person who permits himself thus to be abused? — Scripture saith: There shall be no sodomite of the sons of Israel:2 and it is further said, . . .

Now, he who [actively] commits pederasty, and also [passively] permits himself to be thus abused — R. Abbahu said: On R. Ishmael's view, he is liable to two penalties, one [for the injunction] derived from thou shalt not lie with mankind, and the other for [violating the prohibition,] There shall not be a Sodomite of the sons of Israel. . . .

for there shall be no Sodomite applies to sodomy with mankind.13 . . .

He who submits both to pederasty and to bestiality — R. Abbahu said: On R. Akiba's view, he incurs two penalties; one for thou shalt not lie [with mankind], and the other for thou shalt not lie [with any beast]. But on R. Ishmael's view, he incurs only one punishment, both offences being derived from the single verse, There shall be no Sodomite.19 . . .

Jewish Encyclopedia - Dog

- The dog being an unclean animal, "the breaking of a dog's neck," mentioned as a sacrificial rite in Isa. lxvi. 3 (compare Ex. xiii. 13), indicates an ancient Canaanite practise (see W. R. Smith, "Rel. of Sem." p. 273). The shamelessness of the dog in regard to sexual life gave rise to the name ("dog") for the class of priests in the service of Astarte who practised sodomy ("kedeshim," called also by the Greeks κυναίδοι, Deut. xxiii. 19 [A. V. 18]; compare ib. 18 [17] and Rev. xxii. 15; see Driver ad loc.), though as the regular name of priests attached to the temple of Ashtoret at Larnaca has been found on the monuments (see "C. I. S." i., No. 86).

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=415&letter=D&search=sodomy

Jewish Encyclopedia - Chastity

(e) The unnatural crimes against chastity, sodomy and pederasty, prevalent in heathendom, were strictly prohibited (Lev. xviii. 22, 23; xx. 13, 15, 16; Deut. xxvii. 21).

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=386&letter=C&search=sodomy

Jewish Encyclopedia - DIDACHE - Dependence upon Jewish Custom.

A manual of instruction for proselytes, adopted from the Synagogue by early Christianity, and transformed by alteration and amplification into a Church manual.
2: "Thou shalt not commit adultery" (Ex. xx. 14). (This includes: "Thou shalt not commit sodomy nor fornication.") "Thou shalt not steal" (Ex. xx. 15). . . . "Thou shalt not use witchcraft nor practise sorcery" (Ex. xxii. 18; Lev. xix. 26). (This belongs obviously to the eliminated first part comprising the duties toward God.) "Thou shalt not procure abortion, nor shalt thou kill the new-born child" (compare Wisdom xii. 5). (This is the amplification of Ex. xx. 13, and belongs to verse 1.) "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's goods" (Ex. xx. 17; see verse 6).

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=341&letter=D&search=sodomy

Jewish Encyclopedia - Crime

On the analogy of this Biblical case the Rabbis decide several others (see Burglary). In three cases the person on the point of committing a crime may be killed: where he pursues a neighbor in order to kill him; where he pursues a male to commit sodomy; and where he seeks to ravish a betrothed damsel; for Deut. xxii. 27 indicates the duty of all that hear her cry to help her.

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=301&letter=L&search=sodomy

Jewish Encyclopedia - COMMANDMENTS, THE 613: 3347-53.

Adultery, sodomy, etc. Lev. Xviii. 7, 14, 20, 22, 23.

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=689&letter=C&search=sodomy​