Bible Thumpers

[Reauland]

I'm not sure who you're talking to.

I know that I myself have already gone on record saying that not only do I not have a problem with homosexuality, it's not even my place to have a problem with it.

I've got a post around 15+ pages in that states where I'm coming from on the topic.

 

[Xean]

If thats the case, then where are the quotes from jesus against homosexuals?
Or is it only ok to "open the book" on the OT to use it as a weapon.

I never used the Old Testament as a weapon against homosexuality. And honestly, I stand indifferent to homosexuality. It's not my business, and I'm glad the way I am. I was actually saying that the Bible does not say much about homosexuality. Jesus didn't talk about it. Read my posts. It's my personal belief that the lust that is considered the sin.

 

[Nicolette]

You haven't debunked anything.
1. What makes it crap?
2. You're restating what I have.
3. You're talking about drugs. I mentioned "clinically dead".
4. Which church? The Catholic church? The Catholic church is different from the original churches around the Mediterranean. And the Catholic church is obviously different from the Jewish people as they have temples, not a church.

The Catholic church cannot instantly said to be the end-all-be-all on the topic of God. They did not rewrite the original texts, but they did translate it into their OWN language, Latin. They didn't even allow for the first English translations in Europe, as they had they very man who got made an English translation killed. I don't understand? lol

Its crap because its a cop-out. You cant go out and kill someone and say god said it was ok, and the charges are dropped. Personal responsibility {do you need it?}
2, thats obvious
3. and the difference between an oxygen deprived brain in a clinically dead (loss of brain activity) body and one affected by drugs, or deprived through whiff-its or anything else is what exactly?
4. any church, any temple, any locale where the text of any version of what is known as the bible is interpreted and codified by man.

 

[Nicolette]

I never used the Old Testament as a weapon against homosexuality. And honestly, I stand indifferent to homosexuality. It's not my business, and I'm glad the way I am. I was actually saying that the Bible does not say much about homosexuality. Jesus didn't talk about it. Read my posts. It's my personal belief that the lust that is considered the sin.

I believe brokenchain is the one using the OT against homosexuality. If youre against "lust" though I suppose i'll have to ask for your definition of the term.

 

[Xean]

You do realize you are using the very same argument you claim the others are using right? You're using the Old Testament as a weapon, except against God.

And you've completely dodged the question I asked you earlier.

 

[Reauland]

One trend that I've noticed with this thread is this:

Long after some of the others backed off the topic having said their piece, such notables as WinkleWill and Bigboy whose arguments were both well-spoken and well-reasoned, others seem to have taken up a different torch and seek to burn down everyone of a Christian mindset with equal fervor.

Wasn't this whole thread basically began in light of that same flavor of intolerance under a different brand name?

 

[Nicolette]

You do realize you are using the very same argument you claim the others are using right? You're using the Old Testament as a weapon, except against God.

And you've completely dodged the question I asked you earlier.

I have no interest in discussing jesus, so I ignored it. I came into the thread after reading brokenchain and others attacking homosexuality using OT references. NT is not the OT, so im using the OT as the medium for debate since thats where the attack was based.

 

[Nicolette]

One trend that I've noticed with this thread is this:

Long after some of the others backed off the topic having said their piece, such notables as WinkleWill and Bigboy whose arguments were both well-spoken and well-reasoned, others seem to have taken up a different torch and seek to burn down everyone of a Christian mindset with equal fervor.

Wasn't this whole thread basically began in light of that same flavor of intolerance under a different brand name?

I only attack unreasoned arguments like "homosexuality is evil because god says so." Why does he say so? and what kind of being is god? are both key here, because if "god" is an unreasoning, or immoral being then following what he says is idiocy.

 

[Reauland]

And I would have no choice but to completely agree with you.

Forgive me if I sensed some bile being directed elsewhere.

 

[Xean]

I have no interest in discussing jesus, so I ignored it. I came into the thread after reading brokenchain and others attacking homosexuality using OT references.

Why won't you discuss Jesus? And the question was asked because you thought you had a good indication of God's behavior.

NT is not the OT, so im using the OT as the medium for debate since thats where the attack was based.

"ah. there you go jumping into the NT, to excuse actions done in the OT.

just because jesus redefines the road to heaven, doesnt make the past before him vanish, or rewrite the character of god." - Orchid

Of course the New Testament is not the Old Testament. But both are important; you can't use one part of the Book and not the rest of it as a "medium of debate". You're doing the same as a lot of other people claim everyone does. You select what you want and ignore the rest.

 

[Alerith]

Hmmm, Psychics are going to burn in hell.....yet prophets will not. Ummmm. ok?

 

[Reauland]

Just out of curiosity, has anyone else here ever taken note of just exactly how much of Levitical(OT) law dealt with diet, hygiene, disease, etc.?

As a book of laws (first documentation of health codes, maybe?), perhaps what it was truly trying to do was protect a newly growing society from the "evils" that promiscuity in almost any form can bring: diseases both sexually transmitted and otherwise.

In a day and age when nearly any disease was potentially a deadly threat, it does make perfect sense to me that such lifestyles would get labeled as "evil" by many societies, the diseases being punishments visited upon the wicked by the pantheon of your choice.

Just thinkin out loud here, really . . .

 

[Xean]

Do you know what a prophet is? Jesus was a prophet. Are you saying he should have gone to hell? O.O

The difference is that the prophets (except Jesus) did not obtain their visions and word from God on their own, they were given it to them by God. Psychics draw upon a different power without being authorized to do so.

 

[Alerith]

Do you know what a prophet is? Jesus was a prophet. Are you saying he should have gone to hell? O.O

The difference is that the prophets (except Jesus) did not obtain their visions and word from God on their own, they were given it to them by God. Psychics draw upon a different power without being authorized to do so.

No, im not saying Jesus should have gone to hell. I dont believe in psychics either. I was just pointing out that they are more or less the same thing.

 

[Nicolette]

Of course the New Testament is not the Old Testament. But both are important; you can't use one part of the Book and not the rest of it as a "medium of debate". You're doing the same as a lot of other people claim everyone does. You select what you want and ignore the rest.

They can both be important, but only one is relevant. If youre going to use both books you can simply say "but jesus said such and such and so thats no longer relevant, but he didnt directly address this and so it is." Thats bunk. Hes using OT culture to attack modern culture without referencing NT, so i'm responding to his use of the OT, with the OT.

 

[Xean]

Alerith: But I did explain the difference.

Orchid: Oh ok, though I did reference the New Testament.

I gotta get my programming homework done. ; ;

 

[Nicolette]

Do you know what a prophet is? Jesus was a prophet. Are you saying he should have gone to hell?

um.. jesus did go to hell. (in the story)

 

[Mokk]

Do you know what a prophet is? Jesus was a prophet. Are you saying he should have gone to hell? O.O

The difference is that the prophets (except Jesus) did not obtain their visions and word from God on their own, they were given it to them by God. Psychics draw upon a different power without being authorized to do so.

Lmao.

Ding. WRONG.

A) psychics are probably full of shit.
B) many psychics claim that their gift was from god
C) where the fuck is the office i can go to to make sure i have the proper permits from god to be a psychic?

The fact of the matter is this, it applies to the governmental stance on gay marriages as well:

If you don't reproduce due to sexual orientation you can't manage to make more parishoners for said church now can you?

Donation boxes go empty.
No one comes to worship.
Eventually your religion goes the way of the dodo.

Hence wether or not homosexuality was truly mentioned in the original texts is something no one will know. As is the version most people use today is riddled with innacurate translations and propaganda added by scholars and the church itself during the middle ages.

For that matter your bible there isn't complete at all. Gnostic gospels anyone? nonononono, said the church, those don't tell the truth we'd like the masses to follow as religious law.

This conversation's been over for god knows how many pages now and i'm absolutely convinced that anyone still involved with it lacks the education to make any kind of coherent argument one way or the other. Let it go already.

 

[Nicolette]

Orchid: Oh ok, though I did reference the New Testament.

which I remarked upon and dismissed both times. I have bigger problems with the jesus character than the OT god.

 

[Reauland]

which I remarked upon and dismissed both times. I have bigger problems with the jesus character than the OT god.

Problems with Jesus, or the many atrocities over the years that a bunch of deluded, power-hungry individuals have tried to prop up using His name?