Print

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

[Cryxis, Prince of Doom]

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

[Orange Wizard]

Yeah, that's probably not the best way of going about things. Because we're also supposed to stone people to death if they don't sacrifice young bulls by cutting their throats and burn the corpses every month or so, according to Leviticus.

[Cryxis, Prince of Doom]

Yeah, that's probably not the best way of going about things. Because we're also supposed to stone people to death if they don't sacrifice young bulls by cutting their throats and burn the corpses every month or so, according to Leviticus.

Not after Jesus was crucified
He was the final sacrifice

[Lord Shonus]

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.}

The condemnaton in Leviticus has far more to do with the worship rites of the local non-Jewish religions (many of which are recorded to use ritual sexuality (homo- and hetero- both, but the former stood out more because it was used only for ritual purpose in those regions), while the incident in Sodom is not only contingent on a very specific and disputed interpretation of a specific Hebrew word (translated as "to know in English, many scholars insist that that particular Hebrew word means "to know sexually", while critics of this view cite other clearly non-sexual uses of the same word), but the sin of Sodom was explicitly stated later in the Bible to be inhospitality (which was a big deal in all ancient cultures, but especially so in regions such as the Middle east which environmentally tend to be less welcoming toward man in the first place.) As for the Epistles, not only is the translation suspect, but the groups named tended to be among the dregs of Roman society, and there is a strong basis for interpreting it not as "these things are abominations, but God can forgive them" but as "even those you consider to be worthless are just as worthy of the Kingdom of Heaven as you are."

Quite importantly, there are fragmentary records suggesting that, prior to the consolidation of the Catholic church, gay marriages were performend somewhat routinely by early Christian groups.

[Orange Wizard]

Yeah, that's probably not the best way of going about things. Because we're also supposed to stone people to death if they don't sacrifice young bulls by cutting their throats and burn the corpses every month or so, according to Leviticus.

Not after Jesus was crucified
He was the final sacrifice

We're also not allowed to eat pigs, harvest the edges of fields, pick up fallen grapes, make clothes from two separate materials, plant different types of seed in the same field, eat fruit from a tree less than four years old, trim our beards, cut the hair on our temples, get tattoos, or permanently sell land.

The problem with taking stuff out of context from the Bible (especially Leviticus) is that it's very easy to create laws that are not actually there, or enforce those that are no longer relevant. With the homosexuality example, my church believes that marriage is intended to be between a man and a woman, and that sex outside of that marriage is adultery - a sin. Ergo, a man sleeping with another man is adultery, and therefore sinful. Your mileage may vary, of course. See Lord Shonus' example above.

[ggamer]

Both Peter and Jesus (somwhere in the bible...) Stated that, because we were allowed grace through faith in jesus, we didn't have to follow the laws of the old testament anymore. It's this interesting thing called Covenant Theology, you should check it out some time.

Honestly I used to be in the same boat as Cryxis. However, If you look at the verses in the new testament about homosexuality (Romans something or other and... Acts? I think? maybe Galatians) are rather open to interpretation, as they tend to decry the disregard for marriage as an insitution.

You'll find, if you poke around the theological philosophy scene (very vibrant, if horribly neglected), that most arguments against homosexuality tend to be based around the fact that the main purpose of marriage is a creation mandate, that married couples beget more couples to get married. Honestly, i'm of the opinion nowadays that if you treat marriage with the severity it deserves, it really doesn't matter what the arrangement of your genitals is.

Also, Cryxis, I get that you're in some rough shit right now, but this is a rather risky road to tread on an extremely liberal forum. I would watch what you post unless you're 100% sure about what you put in it.

[Cryxis, Prince of Doom]

Yeah, that's probably not the best way of going about things. Because we're also supposed to stone people to death if they don't sacrifice young bulls by cutting their throats and burn the corpses every month or so, according to Leviticus.

Not after Jesus was crucified
He was the final sacrifice

We're also not allowed to eat pigs, harvest the edges of fields, pick up fallen grapes, make clothes from two separate materials, plant different types of seed in the same field, eat fruit from a tree less than four years old, trim our beards, cut the hair on our temples, get tattoos, or permanently sell land.

The problem with taking stuff out of context from the Bible (especially Leviticus) is that it's very easy to create laws that are not actually there, or enforce those that are no longer relevant. With the homosexuality example, my church believes that marriage is intended to be between a man and a woman, and that sex outside of that marriage is adultery - a sin. Ergo, a man sleeping with another man is adultery, and therefore sinful.
Your mileage may vary, of course. See Lord Shonus' example above.

1 Corinthians 7:2

But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.
Is that better and less out of context for you?


I think I'm going to make a thread for this just to discuss Christian beliefs and have people ask questions about it
Just to move this whole discussion off the sad thread

[Cryxis, Prince of Doom]

Both Peter and Jesus (somwhere in the bible...) Stated that, because we were allowed grace through faith in jesus, we didn't have to follow the laws of the old testament anymore. It's this interesting thing called Covenant Theology, you should check it out some time.

Honestly I used to be in the same boat as Cryxis. However, If you look at the verses in the new testament about homosexuality (Romans something or other and... Acts? I think? maybe Galatians) are rather open to interpretation, as they tend to decry the disregard for marriage as an insitution.

You'll find, if you poke around the theological philosophy scene (very vibrant, if horribly neglected), that most arguments against homosexuality tend to be based around the fact that the main purpose of marriage is a creation mandate, that married couples beget more couples to get married. Honestly, i'm of the opinion nowadays that if you treat marriage with the severity it deserves, it really doesn't matter what the arrangement of your genitals is.

Also, Cryxis, I get that you're in some rough shit right now, but this is a rather risky road to tread on an extremely liberal forum. I would watch what you post unless you're 100% sure about what you put in it.

I stand by what I say
I understand it's liberal but it also accepts other opinions unless I'm wrong and I'm not entitled to an unpopular opinion if I have one


As I say to each his own
I respect everyone's opinions even if they contradict mine
I am simply arguing my opinion and why I beleive what I believe

[Cptn Kaladin Anrizlokum]

This has been over 24 hours, and it's still here. Move it to its own thread please!

[AlleeCat]

I was about to say that this needs its own thread. Theology is great and all but it does not belong in the emotion threads.

[MaximumZero]

There's already a thread for it. Further threads usually get nuked quickly due to the inflammatory nature of the subject.

[Cryxis, Prince of Doom]

Well it has another thread now

[Orange Wizard]

Can we have a link to the thread?

[Execute/Dumbo.exe]

Here
There, and don't start about my link fu.

[TamerVirus]

I...think you got something mixed up there with the link, Dumbo