09 Oct 08
Originally posted by chappy1Relying on the Bible for moral guidance sounds like a prescription for complacency.
Well Christians believe in the Bible and the Bible says that homosexuality is a sin........ so there you go. To a Christian the Bible is where everything is answered and if it says that homosexuality is a sin......then it is. Period.
Don't you ever feel it necessary to take personal responsibility for the justification of your moral beliefs? Isn't it a tad convenient, if not lazy, to assume that a book can do all the hard intellectual or indeed emotional work for you? Is that part of the Bible's appeal? Isn't it some sort of bureaucratic substitute for those who lack the inclination or ability to figure out what really is good or bad for themselves?
It would be laughable to have a book that legislated aesthetics. "For a Christian, ice cream tastes bad because the Bible says so". The same goes for legislating ethics. You can't prescribe morality: you can merely be sensitive to it, or not.
09 Oct 08
Originally posted by chappy1Everyone hates someone. Maybe they want to flatter themselves by saying they don't, but they do.
If you're a real Christian then you're not supposed to hate anyone. So those people aren't being hated by Christians they're being hated by people who say they're Christians.
09 Oct 08
Originally posted by PinkFloydsome say that having a tattoo is a sin. how can you be so superficial? do you think god is as superficial? do you think god cares that you wear pink clothes and have a fashion sense as a man?
LOL I am a Christian. I do not hate you. Your logic is flawed.
Hating a sin is not the same as hating a sinner.
Catholics claim child rapists and serial murderers can be admitted into heaven if they repent. but you will deny a woman heaven because she sits naked next to another woman and/or uses a dildo instead of a man sausage? this is how you picture god?
09 Oct 08
Originally posted by jlillypeople don't choose to be gay just as they don't choose to like oranges over apples. but that doesn't mean they HAVE to engage in homsexual activities.
& you're a backwater thinker from the 18th cent. Come up to the times. People don't choose to be gay. They have the right to have sex with whoever they want.
You're denying volumes of scientific literature on the topic if you claim otherwise.
you seem to claim(correct me if i am mistaken) lesbians have no choice but to sleep with other women as gays have no choice but to sleep with other men. which is not true.
you may like heroine but you can choose not to use it.
now it is absolutely no harm to engage in homosexual activities nor can i imagine a situation where someone will ever be harmed by two gays getting it on. and i can't imagine what reason would god have, the same god that said he is a god of love, for two persons of the same sex not to love each other. gay couples often have babies so even god's multiply command is fulfilled.
09 Oct 08
Originally posted by chappy1actually, the old testament said that it is wrong for two men to get it on. never said anything about women.
Well Christians believe in the Bible and the Bible says that homosexuality is a sin........ so there you go. To a Christian the Bible is where everything is answered and if it says that homosexuality is a sin......then it is. Period.
the objective was procreation. too many gay men and the warmongering jews would not have enough meathshields for their conquests. now it is not the case. in fact, we actually need more gays because we are two many 😀.
the problem is that as with the old testament, the current dogma is controlled by people with sticks up their asses who will sooner eat their fecals than change anything in Za Book, even if Jesus himself came and changed most of the ways. so it is not as if God is absolutely opposed to change. but i guess it is easier to assume only god is capable of it rather than assume responsibility for changing things for the better.
09 Oct 08
Originally posted by PawnokeyholeWhy do you assume that because I believe in the Bible that I do not know what is good or bad for me? Has it ever occured to you that I have tried other things and returned to the Bible as the one Truth?
Relying on the Bible for moral guidance sounds like a prescription for complacency.
Don't you ever feel it necessary to take personal responsibility for the justification of your moral beliefs? Isn't it a tad convenient, if not lazy, to assume that a book can do all the hard intellectual or indeed emotional work for you? Is that part of the Bible's a ...[text shortened]... islating ethics. You can't prescribe morality: you can merely be sensitive to it, or not.
09 Oct 08
Originally posted by ZahlanziActually, in 1 Corinthians 6:9 & 1 Timothy 1:10 it simply says homosexuality and does not designate to which sex it's referring- which of course means ALL homosexuality, not just men.
actually, the old testament said that it is wrong for two men to get it on. never said anything about women.
the objective was procreation. too many gay men and the warmongering jews would not have enough meathshields for their conquests. now it is not the case. in fact, we actually need more gays because we are two many 😀.
the problem is that as wi ...[text shortened]... only god is capable of it rather than assume responsibility for changing things for the better.
09 Oct 08
Originally posted by chappy1It depends which version one is reading. The KJ refers to "abusers of themselves with mankind, and the O.T says "Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind, it is an abomination". so there would seem to be a clear distinction between mankind and womankind. Perhaps with a convenient change of words in translating from original language, one can make any statement mean whatever suits one's prejudice. There is a definite difference between homosexuality and lesbianism, but I doubt that sin-seekers will will be tolerant of either.
Actually, in 1 Corinthians 6:9 & 1 Timothy 1:10 it simply says homosexuality and does not designate to which sex it's referring- which of course means ALL homosexuality, not just men.
09 Oct 08
Originally posted by muppymanAll I know is that either/both are sins in the eyes of God.
It depends which version one is reading. The KJ refers to "abusers of themselves with mankind, and the O.T says "Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind, it is an abomination". so there would seem to be a clear distinction between mankind and womankind. Perhaps with a convenient change of words in translating from original language, one can make a ...[text shortened]... homosexuality and lesbianism, but I doubt that sin-seekers will will be tolerant of either.
