Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

No

Only Judeism

Only Islam

Yes to both Judeism and Islam

[Arcvasti]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't Bible verses that contradict each other be subject to a sort of priority system? As Christians, those teachings taught directly by Jesus should be paramount, the Ten Commandments next, then those of his closest apostles and then the Old Testament, particularly Leviticus. <--- If someone thinks I've put these in the wrong order, please correct me. Jesus himself was pretty egalitarian towards women and taught of love and acceptance.

Interesting with the slant of Biblical verses towards male homosexuality. I personally think this is because most of the people who wrote those verses were somewhat very biased towards men and didn't consider women important enough to mention or something to that effect. Jesus, who, as I mentioned above, was pretty liberal towards women never[At least that I recall. Once again, please correct me if I'm wrong.] actually condemned homosexuality, male or female.

Actually, from what I remember[Been a while since I actually read that part in detail], Mose's laws mandated treating slaves well, which was about as liberal as that really got back then and the New Testament passage seems to be more of a "Turn the other cheek" thing. Jesus was big on teaching by example peacefully.

[Cryxis, Prince of Doom]

I do not believe slavery is a current issue in our world

Though if I were a slave and being forced to work the rest of my life I would do as that verse says

As for the first verse, there is international law against slavery and other parts of the bible say to follow law so slaver is no longer a needed subject to discuss


If this were a different time however and I owned slaves I would treat them as it says to treat them, as property. Now keep in mind I don't mean this in a bad way. Do you ever see someone who is in their right mind bashing their xbox with a sledge hammer? Or how's about someone take an axe to their car?
No, you see people trying to get their gaming systems working better. They try to keep their cars in pristine running condition as best they can. So if I owned slaves (which I don't plan on) I would try to keep them as healthy as possible and great them as the human beings they are

[Arcvasti]

I do not believe slavery is a current issue in our world.

Its still around, mostly in less developed countries and is very nasty. However, in Europe/North America/Australia, it is much less of an issue. Mostly agree with the rest of your post though.

[Cryxis, Prince of Doom]

When I stated that I meant in the developed world, should have been more clear

[Cheeetar]

So theoretically, if slavery wasn't outlawed you'd be fine with it? Just another possession you could have (of course you'd be sure to clothe and feed them).

[Cryxis, Prince of Doom]

So theoretically, if slavery wasn't outlawed you'd be fine with it? Just another possession you could have (of course you'd be sure to clothe and feed them).

It's not around so I can't clearly state how I would act with it present



I do have a problem with forced labor but if slaves were treated as I would treat a slave (more like a modern day servant- half decent food, half decent bed, not terribly hard work, and nice discussions with owner) I honestly wouldn't mind being a slave.

I do not agree with the mistreatment of such persons but as long as they are being treated decently like humans and they don't mind doing what they do, I have no problem with it

[Cheeetar]

I imagine many slaves don't want to be slaves, even if they are well treated. The vast majority, perhaps. Many slaves back in the older days weren't voluntarily slaves- nor in these days. Are you okay with that?

[Cryxis, Prince of Doom]

I imagine many slaves don't want to be slaves, even if they are well treated. The vast majority, perhaps. Many slaves back in the older days weren't voluntarily slaves- nor in these days. Are you okay with that?

No I'm not

But do I own slaves? No
Do I know someone who owns slaves? No

Is there anything I can physically do about the problem? No

[Gnorm]

It really doesn't matter which translation you use.

... not a single solitary one of those specified female homosexual relations as unnatural. They just stated some variation of "unnatural" with no further explanation, which leaves quite a lot of room for interpretation. Some did specify male homosexual relations as a problem. Given the difference, I'd expect that to mean they're talking about different things. Otherwise there would be no need to specifically reference male homosexuality.

And beyond that particular verse, the vast majority (not exactly saying much, to be fair, when there's something like six or seven mentions in the entire text) of references to homosexuality are very specifically in regards to male, and generally even more specifically male prostitution.

It appears as if I misconstrued you when you mentioned the different translations. I was under the impression that you were referring to the fact that some translations are more focused in their condemnations (i.e. I believe 1 Corinthians 6:9 references "those who practice homosexuality" in NRSV, whereas it may be less precise in other translations). In essence, it seems as if I thought you were bringing two issues, when you were actually bringing only one.

How is this discussion even occurring!

Because it's not as straightforward as you're saying. Likewise doesn't imply that males were also indulging in homosexuality as the women were -- likewise just states they were also engaging in unnatural acts, for which homosexuality is mentioned only in reference to men.

I can't agree with your analysis. Whether your Bible says "likewise," "also," or "in the same way," the two verses are inherently connected. When it says, "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature" the picture becomes clear when put into the context provided by the following verse.
As for slavery, Curse of Ham (which was more of an invention by Southerners than anything) aside, the New Testament orders for good treatment of slaves. Nowhere does it say "thou shalt keep slaves," and I honestly don't think that such a thing is what God intends for man to do. I believe that Timothy's neutrality to slavery is to keep from demanding an entire people to give up their customs overnight.

[Cryxis, Prince of Doom]

BTW
There is international law against slavery now a days and in the bible so where that I'll find later
It says to follow the laws of the land unless they contradict the laws of the bible

[Leafsnail]

This thread is a good honeypot for homophobes.

And misogynists I guess.

[Cheeetar]

He stated his initial beliefs about homosexuality ("Hey sad person, you're a sinner and god disapproves") after somebody who was not talking to Cryxis mentioned it in in the sad thread. Cryxis created this thread because he wanted to talk more about his religious beliefs.

I think he intended this thread to be a place to discuss the issue to keep it from leaking further into the thread, or into others. I'd say its a nice thread to have one way or another.

Still, I was not present in the sad thread when the early discussion occurred, so I can neither defend nor support whatever Cryxis might have said. I do not intend to go wading through such a large and fast-growing thread to look for it, either. Could you, perchance, provide quotes?

You can click on the link for the quotes and read the rest of the thread from there if you'd like more of what Cryxis was saying. He, uh, stands by what he said.

Spoiler: The first three quotes (click to show/hide)

Jumping in with a Christianated point of view

While I'm not homophobic
Others might be because it is a sin and also they may fear that that person is attracted to them

Jumping in with a Christianated point of view

While I'm not homophobic
Others might be because it is a sin and also they may fear that that person is attracted to them

I like my friend's way of looking at it. He's a Christian and totally believes homosexuality is a sin, but he's completely fine with gay people because "I sin all the time!"

A lot of the youth group at my church ( including me) believe in, no human is perfect and everyone sins


Why should homosexuals be condemned when I sin just as much as they do

Jumping in with a Christianated point of view

While I'm not homophobic
Others might be because it is a sin and also they may fear that that person is attracted to them

Eyeeaaah.
That point of view seems to pretty much differ tons. Like in our country, wherein 80%+ is Christian (Catholic), we don't see it as a sin. :v (Because in itself, it isn't.)
Just what is done under it--meaning its pretty subjective. Though all cases are often under the same law.

I started to post, particularly about the anti trans sentiment here, how it's ruined my life, etc. Then I didn't and I wasn't so sad, but was still sad.

*hugs* :S
I hate it that people's lives are being ruined because of stupidity and the lack of understanding of something--particularly gender, because of their environment.

I hate it a lot.

I share this sentiment. I also think I said in some other thread that the Bible puts way more emphasis on not being a judgemental prick than not sticking your manly bits in the wrong place.

Pretty much this
And that the Bible isn't against homosexuality, for one. It's in people's interpretations of it -_-
^{I remember muchly how many people keep on quoting Sodom and Gomorrah.
...It's like the single word of 'lust' meant everything pertaining to homosexuality :v Not that there is an obvious difference of what is done and the idea, of course >_> or even if those who did it are...bleh.}

Leviticus 18:22

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

Straight from the bible

[Gnorm]

He stated his initial beliefs about homosexuality ("Hey sad person, you're a sinner and god disapproves") after somebody who was not talking to Cryxis mentioned it in in the sad thread. Cryxis created this thread because he wanted to talk more about his religious beliefs.

I think he intended this thread to be a place to discuss the issue to keep it from leaking further into the thread, or into others. I'd say its a nice thread to have one way or another.

Still, I was not present in the sad thread when the early discussion occurred, so I can neither defend nor support whatever Cryxis might have said. I do not intend to go wading through such a large and fast-growing thread to look for it, either. Could you, perchance, provide quotes?

You can click on the link for the quotes and read the rest of the thread from there if you'd like more of what Cryxis was saying. He, uh, stands by what he said.

Spoiler: The first three quotes (click to show/hide)

Jumping in with a Christianated point of view

While I'm not homophobic
Others might be because it is a sin and also they may fear that that person is attracted to them

Jumping in with a Christianated point of view

While I'm not homophobic
Others might be because it is a sin and also they may fear that that person is attracted to them

I like my friend's way of looking at it. He's a Christian and totally believes homosexuality is a sin, but he's completely fine with gay people because "I sin all the time!"

A lot of the youth group at my church ( including me) believe in, no human is perfect and everyone sins


Why should homosexuals be condemned when I sin just as much as they do

Jumping in with a Christianated point of view

While I'm not homophobic
Others might be because it is a sin and also they may fear that that person is attracted to them

Eyeeaaah.
That point of view seems to pretty much differ tons. Like in our country, wherein 80%+ is Christian (Catholic), we don't see it as a sin. :v (Because in itself, it isn't.)
Just what is done under it--meaning its pretty subjective. Though all cases are often under the same law.

I started to post, particularly about the anti trans sentiment here, how it's ruined my life, etc. Then I didn't and I wasn't so sad, but was still sad.

*hugs* :S
I hate it that people's lives are being ruined because of stupidity and the lack of understanding of something--particularly gender, because of their environment.

I hate it a lot.

I share this sentiment. I also think I said in some other thread that the Bible puts way more emphasis on not being a judgemental prick than not sticking your manly bits in the wrong place.

Pretty much this
And that the Bible isn't against homosexuality, for one. It's in people's interpretations of it -_-
^{I remember muchly how many people keep on quoting Sodom and Gomorrah.
...It's like the single word of 'lust' meant everything pertaining to homosexuality :v Not that there is an obvious difference of what is done and the idea, of course >_> or even if those who did it are...bleh.}

Leviticus 18:22

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

Straight from the bible

From reading the posts, it looks as if it began by him trying to defend his view, then the thing snowballed from there. I will agree that he certainly didn't act with very much tact while on that thread.

[hops]

This thread is a good honeypot for homophobes.

And misogynists I guess.

I haven't seen any actual homophobia. It's just the "Hate the sin, love the sinner" mentality which is understandable since it's their beliefs. I mean, let's say that homosexuality is a bad thing in my eyes and let's compare it to smoking. I think smoking is bad, and I want to discourage people from smoking, but I wouldn't be oppressing smokers.

[Cheeetar]

This thread is a good honeypot for homophobes.

And misogynists I guess.

I haven't seen any actual homophobia. It's just the "Hate the sin, love the sinner" mentality which is understandable since it's their beliefs. I mean, let's say that homosexuality is a bad thing in my eyes and let's compare it to smoking. I think smoking is bad, and I want to discourage people from smoking, but I wouldn't be oppressing smokers.

You 'think' it's bad, or you know that it's bad because of a scientific consensus?