DoubleStandard Morals

[Jayhawker Soule]

Edit. I misread what you said. You stated you have no respect then called me names.

What is your view of Leviticus 20:13?

 

[jeffrey]

Thank You Mr_Sprinkles, and well said. Hopefully we can move on to something else.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

jpgallandt-- Please note that I edited my post to ask you a question of my own.

Oh and by the way....that's "S p i n k l e s". There's no 'R' in Spinkles.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Thank You Mr_Sprinkles, and well said. Hopefully we can move on to something else.

As helpful as that might be to you, there remains some questions that you seem committed to evading.

 

[jeffrey]

jpgallandt-- Please note that I edited my post to ask you a question of my own.

Oh and by the way....that's "S p i n k l e s". There's no 'R' in Spinkles.

1st off, sorry about the name. I am on the road and do not have my Bible with me, so not sure exactly which verse is in question. How I view the OT I have already stated. But i will quote the most common 5 words repeated throughout the OT. And it came to pass. Times change. Why God had some of those laws I do not know therefore cannot answer. He had his reasons and It's not in my place to question him. They served a purpose. All I know is how I'm supposed to live today. The OT is for reference. To learn from. And remember for thousands of years it was passed down by word of mouth. So did God have all those laws? Don't know. But to me it doesn't matter. What Jesus taught is. Love Your Neighbor. No stipulations. Love God. Don't do evil. I read the New Testament for how to live.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Why God had some of those laws I do not know therefore cannot answer. He had his reasons and It's not in my place to question him. They served a purpose.

So you believe that God mandated the killing of homosexuals as a punishment, which "served a purpose", for a lifestye deemed an abomination. Is that correct?

 

[BUDDY]

So you believe that God mandated the killing of homosexuals as a punishment, which "served a purpose", for a lifestye deemed an abomination. Is that correct?

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

This is stuck in the middle of a bunch of laws pertaining to sexual acts that God views as sinful. As I have stated in another post on this thread, God still views sin the same way now as he did then. The difference is that as a New Testament Christian, I live under a new law that requires peace and love towards mankind. God's judgement will decide the fate of those who conduct themselves in a sinful manner, not mine. You must also keep in mind that the Hebrew nation were given these laws because God wanted to keep them morally clean in His sight, and seperate from the world around them. There were at the time, nations of people that were sacrificing children to their gods and committing all kinds of perverted sexual acts in worship to their gods. Jehovah God wanted them to not only be made aware that all these things were unacceptable, but that there was immediate punishment for them. I am trying my hardest to answer your questions Deut., but I am not sure I can. You say that because God views homosexuality as sin, He is therefore a homofobic bigot (I think I quoted you right on that). I say, God gives us information on what does and does not please Him, and we are the ones to decide whether or not we want to follow them. If we don't follow, it's sin. If we do follow, it's not sin. He will judge us according to what He has told us concerning the things we should and should not do. If you still view God in that way, then there is little I can tell you to convince you otherwise, but such statements are rather insulting at times, and there may be a better way of putiing things if you really want to have open discussion.

 

[jeffrey]

So you believe that God mandated the killing of homosexuals as a punishment, which "served a purpose", for a lifestye deemed an abomination. Is that correct?

No. Try reading what I said, not what you wish it to say. Lets turn this around. What do YOU think it means? EDIT: Just read what EEWRED Wrote, And thank you, very well stated. Better then I could ever state it.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

EEWRED, first of all, thank you for the thoughtful and clearly honest reply.

A couple of brief points:

• I do not believe I said that is a homophobic bigot. I said that he is a chauvinist bigot. I believe that the difference is substantial and the latter claim demonstrable.
• My initial point was that "there is an anti-gay Judeo-Christian tradition, rooted in the Bible, which seems unmatched by the non-Abrahamic religions." That point seems undebatable, and the belief that YHWH has a right to such intolerance renders it no less so.
• You say that my statements are "rather insulting at times", and I can fully appreciate that. But I have never and would never suggest that you are an abomination worthy of death. That you would label my statements insulting while embracing Leviticus speaks volumes.

Perhaps what you find most difficult is not my "rather insulting" arguments, but the effort to reconcile the God of Leviticus with your own humanity. In fact, I am convinced that you would treat people far better than He.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

You say that because God views homosexuality as sin, He is therefore a homofobic bigot (I think I quoted you right on that).

Anyone who commands that homosexuals be put to death for having homosexual relations is a homophobic bigot as far as I'm concerned. In this case, I think the fictional character of YHWH was representative of the authors' bigotry, and that of the surrounding Hebrew culture.

 

[jeffrey]

Anyone who commands that homosexuals be put to death for having homosexual relations is a homophobic bigot as far as I'm concerned. In this case, I think the fictional character of YHWH was representative of the authors' bigotry, and that of the surrounding Hebrew culture.

I disagree with that assessment. But you have that right to your opinion. I think It's wrong to pick out one pixel and not see the whole picture. EEWRED I feel panted a pretty good picture of things. But you have your points and views. I respect that. And thank you for respecting mine.

 

[Fluffy]

So you believe that God mandated the killing of homosexuals as a punishment, which "served a purpose", for a lifestye deemed an abomination. Is that correct?

Deut, is this a reference to the city of Sodom story or Leviticus?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Deut, is this a reference to the city of Sodom story or Leviticus?

What a curious question. It is in reference to God mandating the killing of homosexuals as a punishment for acts deemed an abomination.

 

[Fluffy]

What a curious question. It is in reference to God mandating the killing of homosexuals as a punishment for acts deemed an abomination.

Does such an act have basis in scripture though?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Does such an act have basis in scripture though?

See Leviticus 18:22

 

[BUDDY]

EEWRED, first of all, thank you for the thoughtful and clearly honest reply.

A couple of brief points:

• I do not believe I said that is a homophobic bigot. I said that he is a chauvinist bigot. I believe that the difference is substantial and the latter claim demonstrable.
• My initial point was that "there is an anti-gay Judeo-Christian tradition, rooted in the Bible, which seems unmatched by the non-Abrahamic religions." That point seems undebatable, and the belief that YHWH has a right to such intolerance renders it no less so.
• You say that my statements are "rather insulting at times", and I can fully appreciate that. But I have never and would never suggest that you are an abomination worthy of death. That you would label my statements insulting while embracing Leviticus speaks volumes.

Perhaps what you find most difficult is not my "rather insulting" arguments, but the effort to reconcile the God of Leviticus with your own humanity. In fact, I am convinced that you would treat people far better than He.

Yes, I agree that there is certainly a big difference between what you actually said and what I thought you said. MY apologies for the misrepresentation.
I would never tell someone that they are an abomination worthy of death either. That is not my place and I would never presume to know what God's final judgement will be of those. Acording to the old testament, I would meet the same fate for some of the things that I have done too, so it's not like God is throwing out a sentance that only applies to homosexuals. We all have sinned and are therefore worthy of death under the old law. I do not find your arguments insulting. In fact, truth be known, I have always found your arguments well stated and logically thorough. But, you have to admit that sometimes you make quite an effort to rub people the wrong way in making those statements. Like I have said before, I try to look past it because I know you offer a lot to the community on this forum in the realm of intelligence and thorough logic.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Thank you for your kind remarks ...

 

[njcl]

as said gays are born that way,i dont know why they attack christianity as i believe st paul thought being a drunkard as worse as a homosexual,its not like he victimised them in his writings,well no more than fornicators
well i dont condone homosexuality but see nothing wrong in a gay couple adopting a child,first it gives an unwanted child love and affection secondly even gays have parental urges........

 

[Ormiston]

"Gay men much more likely to attempt suicide

Randy Dotinga, Gay.com / PlanetOut.com Network

published Monday, August 5, 2002

In the most extensive study of its kind, researchers found that urban gay men are at least three times more likely than heterosexual men to have planned suicide, attempted it or both. One in five gay men surveyed said they had gone as far as to actually make a plan to commit suicide, and 12 percent attempted it, usually before the age of 25. "


Curious. How much responsibilty does religion take for this? And the Christians are offended by the gay! I think a very "Christian" thing to do would be to support them instead of continually arguing for the right to hate them.

 

[Scuba Pete]

I think a very "Christian" thing

Why stop with Christians? Why not Jews, Muslims and atheists? How about agnostics or Hindus? How about the entire human race?

Bigotry is no respector of religion or race.