Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9173 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,585 Year: 4,842/9,624 Month: 190/427 Week: 0/103 Day: 0/8 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   homosexuality
forgiven
Inactive Member


Message 183 of 239 (27109)
12-17-2002 9:03 PM
Reply to: Message 173 by John
12-17-2002 4:40 PM


quote:
Originally posted by John:
quote:
Originally posted by gene90:
See, we can say we don't have to follow the Law of Moses but then we have things like the Ten Commandments, which all Christian sects seem (Protestants especially) to follow and which seems to be a good guide in how Jews and Christians should act. So when we teach it to the kids we are kind of inconsistent. This is where I guess we "pick and choose".
Precisely the kind of thing I was thinking about.

gene is wrong here, john... the 10 commandments are a part of the law, not a law unto themselves... and christians have died to the law, period... we are no longer under law... we have no need for it, it served its purpose... now that does not mean the law of God is of no account, it simply means it was given for a season and a reason, and both are past

This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by John, posted 12-17-2002 4:40 PM John has not replied

John
Inactive Member


Message 184 of 239 (27128)
12-18-2002 12:39 AM
Reply to: Message 166 by zipzip
12-17-2002 2:28 PM


quote:
Originally posted by zipzip:
John, folks who have thought about these things a lot more than either of us have written books on just bits of your previous post. That is why I cannot go line by line like you and write a little bit to give you a pat answer and still be intellectually honest.
Well.... that is pretty lame, and do I detect a hint of insult? [i]Ad hominem[i]? The sweet sweet smell of hubris? The suggestion that maybe I am not intellectually honest? Ah yes, I think I do detect such things wafting throught the air. These cable connections are incredible!!!
quote:
Which verse from Leviticus or other portion of the OT would you like to start with first so that we can give this a careful, thoughtful inspection?
I don't care. Pick one. Start at the top. Roll some dice. Whatever. It is your turn.
quote:
I stand by my assertion that your interpretation is shallow.
Thus far, I am the only one to provide anything at all. Your post boiled down to "God did all this good stuff and all the other people did bad stuff." Come down off your cloud.
[quote][b]You list the verse, but do not indicate the actual text,[quote][b]
Do you not have a Bible? I have about ten or so.
quote:
contextual or historical information that is pertinent
Do you not have a Bible?
quote:
or the translation (if any) that you are using
I typically read several. If I post a verse, I tend to also post the translation.
But we both know you are stalling, and playing games.
quote:
then you assume that my interpretation of this particular text (lacking context) is the same as yours.
You've got to be joking? I don't assume what you think. See, you are supposed to tell me that part. So far, you have been very hesitant to do so. Peculiar....
quote:
That is not an exegesis, and it isn't intellectually honest.
You made numerous claims that I flat contradict. Instead of making your case you chose to play this game and pitch insults. Where is the honesty in that?
quote:
Let's be honest
I am.
Lets not be so preach-y.
quote:
and if you have serious questions about some verses in the Bible
Lets also not play this master/student game. A lot of people come on here not to debate but to 'teach.' It is very irritating. I can be convinced, but don't treat me like a child. If this isn't you, then, sorry. If it is, drop the pretenses.
quote:
then lets tackle them one at a time and enlist the help of others as we think about what each might mean in context.
ummmm...... I'm waiting for you. You made claims about the wonderful morals in the Bible. I gave you verses I think say different. It is your turn.
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by zipzip, posted 12-17-2002 2:28 PM zipzip has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 185 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-18-2002 1:39 AM John has replied
 Message 187 by zipzip, posted 12-18-2002 5:50 AM John has replied

funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 185 of 239 (27131)
12-18-2002 1:39 AM
Reply to: Message 184 by John
12-18-2002 12:39 AM


zipzip, be careful what you say here, I think John likes to get Christians to blow up and freak out, in order to make you look the fool. Sorry John.
Thus far, I am the only one to provide anything at all. Your post boiled down to "God did all this good stuff and all the other people did bad stuff." Come down off your cloud.
God did do all the good stuff and man all the evil, it's true. Biblically anyway.
You've got to be joking? I don't assume what you think. See, you are supposed to tell me that part. So far, you have been very hesitant to do so. Peculiar....
I wouldn't say you don't assume what people think John, there have been plenty of times I've had to clarify because you've made incorrect assumptions.
Lets also not play this master/student game. A lot of people come on here not to debate but to 'teach.' It is very irritating. I can be convinced, but don't treat me like a child. If this isn't you, then, sorry. If it is, drop the pretenses.
John this is a pride issue, you claim not to believe therefore we as believers attempt to instruct you in the TRUTHS of the bible. Yes sometimes we are wrong and it's good that you put some thought into it instead of taking what we say for gospel truth. On the other hand just because it's from a Christian doesn't mean it's not true. Remember not just children are students. BTW I am not taking a stab at you here John, just trying to help you see were we are coming from.
ummmm...... I'm waiting for you. You made claims about the wonderful morals in the Bible. I gave you verses I think say different. It is your turn.
John you are consistently taking old testament occurances and calling them condoned by God. Oh whatever I give up. I can't get this point through anywhere.
------------------
Saved by an incredible Grace.
[This message has been edited by funkmasterfreaky, 12-18-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by John, posted 12-18-2002 12:39 AM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 188 by zipzip, posted 12-18-2002 6:03 AM funkmasterfreaky has not replied
 Message 195 by nator, posted 12-18-2002 10:47 AM funkmasterfreaky has not replied
 Message 198 by John, posted 12-18-2002 2:33 PM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

Peter
Member (Idle past 1558 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 186 of 239 (27132)
12-18-2002 2:20 AM
Reply to: Message 135 by gene90
12-11-2002 11:18 AM


Oh.
I don't really see the issue.
Any behaviour exhbited by any animal (including humans)
surely falls under the definition of 'natural'.
Similarly any behaviour of any people can become the subject
of one or more cultural taboos.
There is no connection between whether something is natural
and whether it becomes culturally acceptable. Usually these
things seem to be politically motivated ... but that's another
issue I guess.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by gene90, posted 12-11-2002 11:18 AM gene90 has not replied

zipzip
Inactive Member


Message 187 of 239 (27155)
12-18-2002 5:50 AM
Reply to: Message 184 by John
12-18-2002 12:39 AM


John, I was not trying to be preachy. Just honest. I apologize if I came off that way. I really think that by taking these verses on one at a time in context, they can be made clear.
Okay, I will start at the top and will be brief, which this medium requires.
1)It starts right off the bat with Adam n Eve's kids. Lot's daughters take a ride on old dad in Gen. 19:30-38.
As Funkmaster notes, this is a recounting of historical events. Note that the narrator simply (and dryly) notes the details of the pairing and spares the reader any editorial opinion. This is common in both the OT and NT, but in any case suggests that either the cultural and religious context of the events made such an opinion redundant or that the writer (and therefore God) is giving this event a pass.
Since a number of OT passages are very clear on incest, drunkeness and whatever else went on here, and the audience was a Hebrew one, it is reasonable to assume that the automatic response would be strong disapproval. The idea that God is giving this event a pass is not supportable given the local and/or global (textual) context in which this event occurs.
What we do note from the text is that this was a pairing of desperation rather than incestuous desire. Lot's daughters were isolated from civilization after the destruction of Sodom, with no hopes for marriage or family. Their main concern is that they "preserve our family line through our father." Rather than waiting for God, they do this despicable and pitiful thing.
It is interesting to note that the outcome of this pairing takes the form of two sons, Moab and Ben-Ammi, which the text notes are the fathers of the Moabites and Ammonites. Both of these peoples became implacable enemies of Israel, a sad outcome for this family. As you say, Ruth (a heroine of the Bible and the namesake of the love story Ruth), a descendent of Moab, was great-grandmother of King David and therefore an ancestor of Jesus. It is fascinating that Ruth marries Boaz, descended from Rahab, the former prostitute of Jericho (who helped the Israelites defeat Jericho). God has the power to transform the outcome of any sin to produce good.
Although this is a difficult text, it is straightforward in the sense that understanding the intended audience and the scriptural context clears up any apparent discrepancies. This is why, for instance, the original authors who wrote this text and generations of Jews studying the Torah have not stumbled over this passage.
2)Rueben sleeps with his dad's concubine in Gen 35:22.
This brings the sons of Jacob to twelve. God does, in Gen. 49:4, state that Rueben will not excel because of this; right after, in Gen 49:3, lavishing some hefty praise on him.
Unless I misread the text, Reuben's act did not result in offspring, certainly not in a younger brother/son. Benjamin is the youngest, the son of Rachel. In Gen 42:32, the brothers note that "we were twelve brothers, sons of one father."
As you note, Reuben's sin (again told of in a non-editorializing format) has later severe consequences. On his deathbead, Jacob takes away Reuben's birthright because Reuben has "defiled" his father's bed. The 'hefty praise' you note seems more like the first part of a 1-2 punch, and does not seem to contradict the idea that Reuben's actions had consequences.
The text in NIV is:
Gen 49:3-4 -- Reuben, you are my firstborn, my might, the first sign of my strength, excelling in honor, excelling in power.[present tense] Turbulent as the waters [unstable / untrustworthy at times], you will no longer excel for you went up onto your father's bed, onto my couch and defiled it.[future tense]
Reuben is indeed Jacob's firstborn and the first sign of his strength (another way of saying firstborn). Before Jacob was on his deathbed, Reuben may have had a reputation of being an honorable and powerful man. As firstborn, he almost certainly held sway over the other brothers and their families in a very noticeable way.
But Jacob recognizes that Reuben has also been at times untrustworthy (in this case despicably so) and for this removes his birthright. This recognition had gone unspoken for many years, although "all israel" apparently knew about the original act. Jacob also tells Reuben that from this point on Reuben will not excel as he had before (perhaps as a result of not receiving the birthright and because of this open airing of 'dirty laundry').
This passage appears to me to be straightforward. Again, we know from cultural context that the intent of the original authors was not to cast doubt on the God they worshipped. This makes it very unlikely that any internal inconsistency was apparent at the time this text was written. Any apparent inconsistency that might occur is probably due to our modern misreading or misinterpretation of the text, the context, or in our understanding of the intended audience (the cultural and religious context).
John, I am not an expert at this type of thing, but I know that a careful exegesis of the Bible is essential for understanding. A prerequesite for understanding the Bible, though, is to assume that God is omnipotent, compassionate, merciful, forgiving, and just. Now hold on a second if your sensibilities are riled!
This is a prerequisite because this is the assumption that the original authors of the Bible were under -- in essence, this was the 'given' of the text. To read it with an eye to discredit or impugn God will always leave you blinded by apparent inconsistencies because the intent of the authors and the mindset of the intended audience has been ignored. In other words, you have to adopt the mindset of the authors and the intended audience to really understand the Bible the way it was intended.
Now about the other passages, this is way past my bedtime. I would welcome some help from others if they wish to chime in and look at the other passages in message #153? Funkmaster, care to take one on? If not, I will get to it later.
Take care, John and all

This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by John, posted 12-18-2002 12:39 AM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 199 by John, posted 12-18-2002 5:41 PM zipzip has not replied

zipzip
Inactive Member


Message 188 of 239 (27157)
12-18-2002 6:03 AM
Reply to: Message 185 by funkmasterfreaky
12-18-2002 1:39 AM


Thanks, Funk. It is easy to get riled sometimes. Thankfully the Bible stands on its own. Besides, John will make an intelligent, eloquent, and thoughtful Christian someday. I would rather we be friends when that day comes around. [meant in all seriousness, John]
in <><

This message is a reply to:
 Message 185 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-18-2002 1:39 AM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

Delshad
Inactive Member


Message 189 of 239 (27166)
12-18-2002 7:10 AM


Just wished to give you my view about the question of barbary and savage in the OT.
I have previously stated that many passages have been added by human pen and I stand by it, but that can`t be the whole story behind.
There are some passages that couldn`t have had a profitable value to the one wishing to corrupt the OT.
I think that every prophet had been given a message which the receiving society in that specific time period could live by.
Therefore, looking back at previous scriptures and comparing our own with them, and to state that the previous where barbaric is wrong, it was all relative.
That is , the message given to earlier civilisations where regarded as the most graceful truth because the customs they compared it with seemed so brutile and barbaric compared to it.
But as time went, and societies developed, Allah`s (Gods) message changed in the same pace.
So if The NT had been revealed to the Jews 4000 yers ago, I doubt the acceptance the Jewish civilisation would have given to it.
To me it all makes sense, but Im curious about others opinion as well.

Replies to this message:
 Message 190 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-18-2002 7:34 AM Delshad has not replied

funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 190 of 239 (27170)
12-18-2002 7:34 AM
Reply to: Message 189 by Delshad
12-18-2002 7:10 AM


Wow, that's awesome Delshad, well put I can agree with you.
------------------
Saved by an incredible Grace.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by Delshad, posted 12-18-2002 7:10 AM Delshad has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2249 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 191 of 239 (27203)
12-18-2002 10:20 AM
Reply to: Message 156 by gene90
12-17-2002 1:13 PM


quote:
Originally posted by gene90:
quote:
However, there are lots of things that can be "made to" make sense, or not make sense, in a theological context, depending upon one's interpretation of the Theology.
I'll agree with that.
quote:
I also suppose that it depends upon how comfortable you are with suspending your reason and intelligence in favor of said theology.
Clarify your point. Are you saying that Christian theology should allow homosexuality?

Sure, why not, now that we know that homosexual people are not evil, posessed by demons, or whatever.
I mean, we don't practice slavery anymore, even though it was considered just fine in the Bible.
Christians have generally decided that it is OK to wear mixed fiber clothing, even though it is an "abomination" according to the Bible.
I think it is just arbitrary discrimination, male fear, strongly enforced by the culture that gay people are singled out and skapegoated.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by gene90, posted 12-17-2002 1:13 PM gene90 has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2249 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 192 of 239 (27204)
12-18-2002 10:24 AM
Reply to: Message 159 by John
12-17-2002 1:29 PM


quote:
Originally posted by John:
quote:
Originally posted by gene90:
I find it odd that the opposition is bring up Leviticus and the Law of Moses when they are almost irrelevant to Christianity.
I find it odd that, this being the case, Christians don't ditch the OT. They keep it around and pick and chose what they want out of it and throw away the rest claiming that Christ fullfilled this and that. Nowhere in the NT does Jesus state exactly what is to go and what is to stay, so people pick and choose per personnal preference. It doesn't make sense.

That is pretty much my point, as well.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by John, posted 12-17-2002 1:29 PM John has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2249 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 193 of 239 (27205)
12-18-2002 10:30 AM
Reply to: Message 165 by gene90
12-17-2002 2:24 PM


quote:
How many of you like you steaks rare?
quote:
I don't. I want that thing cooked.
Blech. Well-done steak is dry and gross.
quote:
Where I grew up it was common for kids to go deer hunting with there dads and drink the blood of thier first kill.
quote:
Sick.
Do you think the Massai are sick?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by gene90, posted 12-17-2002 2:24 PM gene90 has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2249 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 194 of 239 (27207)
12-18-2002 10:33 AM
Reply to: Message 168 by John
12-17-2002 2:33 PM


quote:
I don't kill my own food but it's my understanding that strangling is not used amongst the meat packing industry (too inefficient). If I were to know that that steak was strangled I wouldn't eat it.
quote:
I've known people to do this-- something about adrenaline and tender meat.
Actually, adrenaline makes meat tough and produces a lot of bad flavors.
(I work in the specialty food industry)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by John, posted 12-17-2002 2:33 PM John has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2249 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 195 of 239 (27209)
12-18-2002 10:47 AM
Reply to: Message 185 by funkmasterfreaky
12-18-2002 1:39 AM


quote:
God did do all the good stuff and man all the evil, it's true. Biblically anyway.
Really? According to this passage of Leviticus, God is doing some pretty evil things:
26:16
I also will do this unto you; I will even appoint over you terror, consumption, and the burning ague, that shall consume the eyes, and cause sorrow of heart: and ye shall sow your seed in vain, for your enemies shall eat it.
26:17
And I will set my face against you, and ye shall be slain before your enemies: they that hate you shall reign over you; and ye shall flee when none pursueth you.
[Injustice] 26:18
And if ye will not yet for all this hearken unto me, then I will punish you seven times more for your sins.
26:19
And I will break the pride of your power; and I will make your heaven as iron, and your earth as brass:
26:20
And your strength shall be spent in vain: for your land shall not yield her increase, neither shall the trees of the land yield their fruits.
26:21 [Injustice]
And if ye walk contrary unto me, and will not hearken unto me; I will bring seven times more plagues upon you according to your sins.
[Cruelty] [Family Values] [Injustice]
26:22
I will also send wild beasts among you, which shall rob you of your children , and destroy your cattle, and make you few in number; and your high ways shall be desolate.
26:23
And if ye will not be reformed by me by these things, but will walk contrary unto me;
[Injustice] 26:24
Then will I also walk contrary unto you, and will punish you yet seven times for your sins.
[Cruelty] [Injustice]
26:25
And I will bring a sword upon you, that shall avenge the quarrel of my covenant: and when ye are gathered together within your cities, I will send the pestilence among you; and ye shall be delivered into the hand of the enemy.
26:26
And when I have broken the staff of your bread, ten women shall bake your bread in one oven, and they shall deliver you your bread again by weight: and ye shall eat, and not be satisfied.
26:27
And if ye will not for all this hearken unto me, but walk contrary unto me;
[Injustice] 26:28
Then I will walk contrary unto you also in fury; and I, even I, will chastise you seven times for your sins.
[Family Values] [Cruelty] [Injustice]
26:29
And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of your daughters shall ye eat.
26:30
And I will destroy your high places, and cut down your images, and cast your carcases upon the carcases of your idols, and my soul shall abhor you.
26:31
And I will make your cities waste, and bring your sanctuaries unto desolation, and I will not smell the savour of your sweet odours.
26:32
And I will bring the land into desolation: and your enemies which dwell therein shall be astonished at it.
[Cruelty] [Injustice]
26:33
And I will scatter you among the heathen, and will draw out a sword after you: and your land shall be desolate, and your cities waste.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 185 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-18-2002 1:39 AM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 196 by David unfamous, posted 12-18-2002 12:15 PM nator has not replied
 Message 197 by zipzip, posted 12-18-2002 2:30 PM nator has replied

David unfamous
Inactive Member


Message 196 of 239 (27217)
12-18-2002 12:15 PM
Reply to: Message 195 by nator
12-18-2002 10:47 AM


That's not very nice.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 195 by nator, posted 12-18-2002 10:47 AM nator has not replied

zipzip
Inactive Member


Message 197 of 239 (27235)
12-18-2002 2:30 PM
Reply to: Message 195 by nator
12-18-2002 10:47 AM


I don't understand, what is the point of taking this out of context? The beginning of the passage is earlier:
If you follow my decrees and are careful to obey my commands, I will send you rain in its season, and the ground will yield its crops and the trees of the field their fruit. Your threshing will continue until grape harvest and the grape harvest will continue until planting, and you will eat all the food you want and live in the safety in your land.
I will grant peace in the land, and you will lie down and no one will make you afraid....
...I will look on you with favor and make you fruitful and increase your numbers and I will keep my covenant with you...
v.14: But if you will not listen to me and carry out all these commands, and if you reject my decrees and abhor my laws and fail t carry out all my commands, and so violate my covenant, then I will do this to you...
v.18: If after all this you will not listen to me...
v.21: If you remain hostile toward me and refuse to listen to me...
v.23: If in spite of these things you do not accept my correction but continue to be hostile toward me...
v.27: If in spite of this you still do not listen to me but continue to be hostile to me...
v.40: But if they will confess their sins and the sins of their fathers -- their treachery against me and their hostility toward me...
In other words, these people just would not get the picture and God removed his blessing from them.
The grand sweep of the history of Israel is one of a wayward child that continually cycles between desperate wickedness and disobedience (anywhere from sacrificing on the high places to sacrificing children to Molech like their neighbors) and acknowledgment of the one true God. Despite their incredible history of betrayal, forgetfulness, and ingratitude, God repeatedly takes Israel back.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 195 by nator, posted 12-18-2002 10:47 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 202 by nator, posted 12-19-2002 11:02 AM zipzip has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024