Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sodomy vs. Shellfish

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    I see the cafeteria Christians are playing "my sin is nicer than your sin" again.
    This message is hidden because ...

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by jjkky View Post
      Homosexuality is very normal behavior. It has been studied and proven that over 1500 specials within the animal kingdom practice homosexuality. This frequent observation of homosexual behavior in animals has been seen as an argument for the acceptance of homosexuality in humans as natural, however, this conclusion is controversial due to opposition to the LGBT social movements and many experts in the field are reluctant to extrapolate from animals to humans. Some consider it also counters the 'peccatum contra naturam' ('sin against nature') — after Thomas Aquinas. Whether this has logical or ethical implications is also a source of debate, with some arguing that it is illogical to use animal behavior to justify what is or is not moral. Morality is a human trait and has just as many arguments as to what or who defines morality. Morality is not exclusive to biblical teachings, contrary to Christian beliefs. The problem I see with Christian morality stems from idolatry of the Bible instead of the glorious gifts of God's love for ALL His children. Christians have made God into their image instead of us being made in His image.

      Regardless of these arguments, homosexuality is natural. It is only unnatural to those who lack understanding of one of God's most wonderful gifts to express one's love for another. I can't help but wonder if the reason Christians from the medieval period (Thomas Aquinas) and today are against it because if reproduction isn't possible, then the church can't grow which is essential for religious domination.
      The issue is not whether homosexual behaviour is natural or normal. It is whether it is immoral.

      But even on the issue of whether it is natural, you seem to be saying that because homosexuality occurs then it must be natural. That's assuming the conclusion.
      Total Misanthropy.
      Uncertain salvation.
      Luck of the draw.
      Irresistible damnation.
      Persecution of the saints.

      Time is an illusion; lunchtime doubly so.
      (The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy)

      RevTestament: It doesn't matter to me too much that the "New Testament wasn't written in Hebrew.
      Dialogos: Calvin, as a sinner, probably got some things wrong.
      Brandplucked: I'm shocked that other people disagree with me.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by DXPose View Post
        [ATTACH]15397[/ATTACH] VS. [ATTACH]15392[/ATTACH]

        “If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death.” -- Leviticus 20:13

        “You shall not eat their flesh, but you shall regard their carcasses as an abomination. Whatever in the water does not have fins or scales—that shall be an abomination to you.” -- Leviticus 11:11-12

        In order understand the context when reading Bible verses which condemns certain behaviors, we must simply distinguish the dietary or ceremonial laws given by God specifically to the nation of Israel, from the moral laws which are absolutely unchanging and still applicable today.
        Nope. Paul for example has said "If you are bound to one law (of circumcision) then you are bound to the whole law." Galatians.

        The important distinction between these laws is reflected in the Old Testament penalties for breaking them: Disobedience to the ceremonial laws resulted in uncleanness (Lev. 11), while breaching the moral law was punishable by death (Lev. 20).
        When God finished giving the laws regarding sexual immorality such as adultery, incest, bestiality and sodomy, He closed with a warning in Leviticus 18:24-26:
        Sounds like you are looking for an excuse to now avoid the responsibility that you have once taken upon yourself.

        These prohibitions given by God provide protection for the population from sexually transmitted diseases and the subsequent damage that could come from an outbreak of disease within the community.
        Can you give the scripture reference for that?

        A society has a moral structure upon which it rests, and when sexual immorality spreads rampant while acts of perversion become commonplace, the moral health and structure of the society begins to collapse.

        In their desperation to twist the text, pro-homo scholars argue that Christians are no longer under the Mosaic Law,
        Whatever their argument is, it is certainly true that Christians are not subject to the Mosaic law.

        therefore homosexuality must be okay since eating shellfish is no longer considered to be a sin. It’s true that the ceremonial and dietary laws have no implication on believers now since these laws were abolished in the New Testament (Mark 7:19; Acts 10:12-13, Heb. 10:8-10),
        A lot of scripture but it doesn't support your point!

        but much to their demise and those who foolishly follow, what these so-called scholars conveniently overlook is the obvious fact that the moral laws are repeatedly reinforced all throughout the New Testament (Mark 7:20-23, Rom. 13:13, 2 Cor. 12:21, Gal. 5:19-21, Eph. 5:3-7, Col. 3:5-6, 1 Thes. 4:3-5, 1 Tim. 1:8-11, Heb. 13:4, Jude 1:6-7, Rev. 22:14-15).

        Romans 1:25-27 clearly reveals God's judgment on homos: “Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves...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: Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.”
        I'm not trying to defend homosexuality here but this passage (once again) doesn't support what you are saying about it. It sounds to me as if in this passage, homosexuality (and lesbianism) were themselves the punishments for arrogance.

        Homosexuals reap a bitter harvest of emotional ruin and physical suffering permeating with disease leading to an untimely death. Though HIV/AIDS is not necessarily a direct punishment from God, it certainly is a devastating consequence of the sinful perversion when men choose to defile themselves.

        I Corinthians 6:9-10 warns us again: “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor HOMOSEXUALS, nor SODOMITES, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.”

        Eating shellfish is a rather harmless act with no moral implications, whereas history is replete with accounts of homosexuality as a deviant, destructive and anti-societal behavior resulting in the end of a culture and eternal damnation for those who practice it.

        Revelation 21:8 gives a final warning: “But the cowardly, unbelieving, ABOMINABLE, murderers, SEXUALLY IMMORAL, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”
        Total Misanthropy.
        Uncertain salvation.
        Luck of the draw.
        Irresistible damnation.
        Persecution of the saints.

        Time is an illusion; lunchtime doubly so.
        (The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy)

        RevTestament: It doesn't matter to me too much that the "New Testament wasn't written in Hebrew.
        Dialogos: Calvin, as a sinner, probably got some things wrong.
        Brandplucked: I'm shocked that other people disagree with me.

        Comment


        • #49
          Friends, there seems to be a lot of jumping through hoops trying to divide up the Old Testament laws into things like ceremonial, moral and who knows what else. You often hear people say that it is really the ten commandments that are still binding on Christians. Yet others say that you have to transpose the OT laws into our modern culture. And so it goes on and on, people trying to get round the law, people trying to pick and choose.

          "What? But officer I am not subject to the laws of parking. These are not moral laws. The laws of parking are only there to stop people who profligately and selfishly block the roads and I am certainly not one of those. I was only there 10 minutes and besides..."

          You get the point? Law doesn't work like that! Just get real ok? Law isn't something you have any choice about. If you don't like the laws of your country, the ones you were born under, your only options are to lobby through the usual channels to get them changed or to leave the country.

          Not one jot or tittle of the law will pass away until all things have been fulfilled. Heaven and Earth would sooner pass away. You have it from the Master. Sorry for sounding preachy but what you are doing is compromising the meaning of the Bible.
          Total Misanthropy.
          Uncertain salvation.
          Luck of the draw.
          Irresistible damnation.
          Persecution of the saints.

          Time is an illusion; lunchtime doubly so.
          (The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy)

          RevTestament: It doesn't matter to me too much that the "New Testament wasn't written in Hebrew.
          Dialogos: Calvin, as a sinner, probably got some things wrong.
          Brandplucked: I'm shocked that other people disagree with me.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Granite View Post
            That means you'll never use the "homosexuality is unnatural" argument, right?
            I like to use the Biblical arguments against homosexual acts.
            One of them is Paul's argument that it is not natural:

            Romans 1
            27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

            Learn to read what is written.

            _____
            The people who are supposed to be experts and who claim to understand the science are precisely the people who are blind to the evidence.
            ~ Dr Freeman Dyson

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by jjkky View Post
              According to your logic, shrimp and lobster is an abomination and should be as grave a sin as your belief in homosexual immorality. Also according your logic, slavery is just, multiple wives, subordination of women, selling children to slavery are all justified as well.
              So what is your point?
              Do you have a problem with any of these things?

              I find it interesting that there is no reason given why homeosexuality is immoral other than "God says so" by the homophobics. It is just a biased and ignorant stance by homophobic when in fact, it is just as much an expression of love for one another as heterosexuals share.
              Homosexual acts are an expression of hatred against God.
              Learn to read what is written.

              _____
              The people who are supposed to be experts and who claim to understand the science are precisely the people who are blind to the evidence.
              ~ Dr Freeman Dyson

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Desert Reign View Post
                Friends, there seems to be a lot of jumping through hoops trying to divide up the Old Testament laws into things like ceremonial, moral and who knows what else. You often hear people say that it is really the ten commandments that are still binding on Christians. Yet others say that you have to transpose the OT laws into our modern culture. And so it goes on and on, people trying to get round the law, people trying to pick and choose.

                "What? But officer I am not subject to the laws of parking. These are not moral laws. The laws of parking are only there to stop people who profligately and selfishly block the roads and I am certainly not one of those. I was only there 10 minutes and besides..."

                You get the point? Law doesn't work like that! Just get real ok? Law isn't something you have any choice about. If you don't like the laws of your country, the ones you were born under, your only options are to lobby through the usual channels to get them changed or to leave the country.

                Not one jot or tittle of the law will pass away until all things have been fulfilled. Heaven and Earth would sooner pass away. You have it from the Master. Sorry for sounding preachy but what you are doing is compromising the meaning of the Bible.
                You need to spend more time studying Galatians. The Law was the Old Covenant with Israel. Jesus completed that Covenant with His death and resurrection and His blood sealed the New Covenant. We are no longer under the Covenant of Law (A law the brings only death) we are now under the Covenant of Grace that brings salvation to those who accept it.
                Galatians 5:22-23 (New International Version)

                But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

                What are my fruits today?

                Cityboy With Horses A blog about what happens when you say, "I Promise"

                "Moral standards" are a lot like lighthouses: they exist to help us stay on course as we sail through life. But we have to steer BY them, but not directly AT them. Lest we end up marooned on the shoals of perpetual self-righteousness.

                Comment


                • #53
                  "Old Covenant" - Law written on tablets of stone, no power given to keep it.
                  "New Covenant" - Law written on tablets of heart, God will cause them to keep it.

                  Both covenants involve THE LAW, and both are made with the house of Judah, and house of Israel.
                  Originally posted by Interplanner
                  They can't compete with a real writer and grammar scholar
                  Originally posted by Interplanner
                  You're too literal to get it.
                  Originally posted by Interplanner
                  The New Covenant preceded the Old Covenant.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by CabinetMaker View Post
                    You need to spend more time studying Galatians. The Law was the Old Covenant with Israel. Jesus completed that Covenant with His death and resurrection and His blood sealed the New Covenant. We are no longer under the Covenant of Law (A law the brings only death) we are now under the Covenant of Grace that brings salvation to those who accept it.
                    You perhaps didn't notice my previous post in which I specifically stated that Christians were not subject to the law of Moses. But that doesn't mean that anyone can then reinterpret the Old Testament by dividing up the law in a way that it was never meant to be divided up. The law pointed to Christ and if you play about with it, then it can no longer fulfil that important role.
                    Total Misanthropy.
                    Uncertain salvation.
                    Luck of the draw.
                    Irresistible damnation.
                    Persecution of the saints.

                    Time is an illusion; lunchtime doubly so.
                    (The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy)

                    RevTestament: It doesn't matter to me too much that the "New Testament wasn't written in Hebrew.
                    Dialogos: Calvin, as a sinner, probably got some things wrong.
                    Brandplucked: I'm shocked that other people disagree with me.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Desert Reign View Post
                      You perhaps didn't notice my previous post in which I specifically stated that Christians were not subject to the law of Moses. But that doesn't mean that anyone can then reinterpret the Old Testament by dividing up the law in a way that it was never meant to be divided up. The law pointed to Christ and if you play about with it, then it can no longer fulfil that important role.
                      Okay. My bad. I apologize for my comment which was out of line. I agree that OT law cannot be divided they way many people attempt to divide it.
                      Galatians 5:22-23 (New International Version)

                      But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

                      What are my fruits today?

                      Cityboy With Horses A blog about what happens when you say, "I Promise"

                      "Moral standards" are a lot like lighthouses: they exist to help us stay on course as we sail through life. But we have to steer BY them, but not directly AT them. Lest we end up marooned on the shoals of perpetual self-righteousness.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        No probs CM.

                        Perhaps it is worth emphasising this part of my first post:

                        These prohibitions given by God provide protection for the population from sexually transmitted diseases and the subsequent damage that could come from an outbreak of disease within the community.
                        I replied:

                        Can you give the scripture reference for that?
                        I have seen this kind of explanation given quite often. It sounds like an excellent thing to say because it makes out the Bible to be far ahead of its time by several thousand years. It's the sort of thing you might try to say to a non-Christian in support of the Gospel: "Hey look the Bible isn't such an old fashioned book at all, it even proves that God knew about STDs and other forms of bacteria."

                        But this is rubbish and there are quite a few good reasons for that:

                        1. It elevates science above the Bible.
                        2. It proves the modern conceit that we now know more than anyone else has done before (and that therefore we are the best kind of people).
                        3. It might not be true at all. (Hence my asking for a scripture reference to show where this was in the Bible). I'm not saying STDs aren't carried by promiscuous relations, etc., just that this particular explanation of the commandments is not in the Bible.
                        4. It suppresses the true meaning of these particular commands and hence obliterates a significant part of the Bible. The true meaning is actually given in the Bible itself on several occasions. The refrain "You must be holy, as I am holy" occurs in the relevant passages enough times to have warranted it being given the nickname "The Holiness Code". But when the emphasis is only placed on how technically advanced the Bible is, this message is lost. It is in fact suppressed. This is a crime.
                        5. It's just sensationalism. (Which is perhaps a summary of the previous points so not a reason in its own right.)
                        6. It's culture-bound. This is similar to 1/2 above but consider even it were a good idea now to emulate the positive features of modern science, perhaps in another few decades, the feeling might be quite different. Perhaps the whole world would be more into magic or other religious or supernatural affiliations. Saying that the Bible predicted STDs might be taken to be quite negative in certain conceivable cultures.
                        Last edited by Desert Reign; July 2nd, 2010, 05:34 PM.
                        Total Misanthropy.
                        Uncertain salvation.
                        Luck of the draw.
                        Irresistible damnation.
                        Persecution of the saints.

                        Time is an illusion; lunchtime doubly so.
                        (The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy)

                        RevTestament: It doesn't matter to me too much that the "New Testament wasn't written in Hebrew.
                        Dialogos: Calvin, as a sinner, probably got some things wrong.
                        Brandplucked: I'm shocked that other people disagree with me.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by CabinetMaker View Post
                          Okay. My bad. I apologize for my comment which was out of line. I agree that OT law cannot be divided they way many people attempt to divide it.
                          sigpic

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by genuineoriginal View Post
                            So what is your point?
                            Do you have a problem with any of these things?


                            Homosexual acts are an expression of hatred against God.
                            Don't you have a problem with slavery?!

                            Well this is fun isn't it?

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Arthur Brain View Post
                              Don't you have a problem with slavery?!


                              John 8:34 (New International Version)

                              34Jesus replied, "I tell you the truth, everyone who sins is a slave to sin.


                              If you are committing homosexual acts, you are enslaving yourself to a wicked master.
                              Learn to read what is written.

                              _____
                              The people who are supposed to be experts and who claim to understand the science are precisely the people who are blind to the evidence.
                              ~ Dr Freeman Dyson

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                I have gone through Dani's blog. I am impressed with it. It is a great resource. I have featured it in my own blog. You aren't even supposed to object to homosexuality now and it is going to get worse, I reckon.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X