Homosexuality and Religion

[rheff78]

1 Corinthians 7

Principles of Marriage

1 Now concerning the things of which you wrote to me:
It is good for a man not to touch a woman. 2 Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband. 3 Let the husband render to his wife the affection due her, and likewise also the wife to her husband. 4 The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. And likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. 5 Do not deprive one another except with consent for a time, that you may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again so that Satan does not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 6 But I say this as a concession, not as a commandment. 7 For I wish that all men were even as I myself. But each one has his own gift from God, one in this manner and another in that.
8 But I say to the unmarried and to the widows: It is good for them if they remain even as I am; 9 but if they cannot exercise self-control, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.


This is all about passion and desire that most can not control...Whether they be man woman..virgin or widow...Paul new this..he was not "naive" in this repect..He knew people would be miserbale and distracted..and do it anyway..So he gave intructions..Argue with Paul Rheff.

Blessings

Dallas

So, you've just proved that the Bible preaches against homosexuality, but you seem to be ok with it. Contradictory maybe? yes, I mean naive. IMHO you may need to actually look at what Christianity says about homosexuals instead of just buying in to everything that people say is positive about it on her.

 

[Magic Man]

So, you've just proved that the Bible preaches against homosexuality, but you seem to be ok with it. Contradictory maybe? yes, I mean naive. IMHO you may need to actually look at what Christianity says about homosexuals instead of just buying in to everything that people say is positive about it on her.

Where does it say in that text that homosexuality is bad? I seem to have missed it.

Also, do you think that your wife doesn't have authority over her own body, and that you do have authority over hers?

 

[rheff78]

Where does it say in that text that homosexuality is bad? I seem to have missed it.

Also, do you think that your wife doesn't have authority over her own body, and that you do have authority over hers?

Then you don't know what it's saying. A man and wife are one body after they get married. Neither has authority over their own body, cause it now belongs to each other. They are joined. Also, in the text I beleive it says to lay down with your wife or husband whatever the case my be. A husband lay with his wife and wife lay with her husband. Nothing about husband lay down with your husband and....well you get the point.

 

[Magic Man]

Then you don't know what it's saying. A man and wife are one body after they get married. Neither has authority over their own body, cause it now belongs to each other. They are joined. Also, in the text I beleive it says to lay down with your wife or husband whatever the case my be. A husband lay with his wife and wife lay with her husband. Nothing about husband lay down with your husband and....well you get the point.

Ah, I see. So, by omitting the mention of it completely, it's saying that it's bad. I don't interpret it that way. I think that if that's what the passage meant, it would have specifically stated "a man shall not lie with another man" etc.

 

[rheff78]

oh, so you're what we would call a strict interpreter of things. If it doesn't expressly say it, then you can do it. If you were in my class I would have to specifically tell you not to hit someone in the face, because my rule of respect one another doesn't really tell you you can't do that. I see.

 

[Magic Man]

oh, so you're what we would call a strict interpreter of things. If it doesn't expressly say it, then you can do it. If you were in my class I would have to specifically tell you not to hit someone in the face, because my rule of respect one another doesn't really tell you you can't do that. I see.

So, where does it end, then? The point is that if it doesn't specifically say it's bad, then you can't assume it's bad. All you can assume is that it's not good, but "not good" doesn't equal "bad". I know you like to see things in black and white, but there isn't much in life that is that way.

 

[rheff78]

wait, not good does not equal bad? Where does your line of reasoning end? By your own standards if someone doesn't specifically say, "hey, don't dump in someone's lunchbox" then you can.

 

[fantome profane]

wait, not good does not equal bad? Where does your line of reasoning end? By your own standards if someone doesn't specifically say, "hey, don't dump in someone's lunchbox" then you can.

And by your logic if someone doesn’t specifically say it is ok to eat peanut butter and tuna sandwiches then it would be a sin.

Maybe it is ok for us to think for ourselves.

 

[Autodidact]

Yes, homosexuality is against the Bible. God created man and a woman for each other. Homosexuality is a choice, just like living God is a choice.

O.K., Andrew, you've now eliminated two possible religions from consideration, Islam and Christianity--at least according to certain contributors to this thread. May I suggest atheism? It goes very well with homosexuality for me.

 

[Autodidact]

So, you've just proved that the Bible preaches against homosexuality, but you seem to be ok with it. Contradictory maybe? yes, I mean naive. IMHO you may need to actually look at what Christianity says about homosexuals instead of just buying in to everything that people say is positive about it on her.

Can't see anything about homosexuality in that selection.

 

[Autodidact]

oh, so you're what we would call a strict interpreter of things. If it doesn't expressly say it, then you can do it. If you were in my class I would have to specifically tell you not to hit someone in the face, because my rule of respect one another doesn't really tell you you can't do that. I see.

Is it your approach that everything not specifically mentioned in the Bible is prohibited, such as zippers, cell-phones and velcro? I know some Christians take that approach, but it seems a bit challenging.

 

[rheff78]

No but when things are alluded to, such as husband and wife etc, that's when you can start paying attention.

 

[Magic Man]

No but when things are alluded to, such as husband and wife etc, that's when you can start paying attention.

So, if they just forgot the part about a husband and husband because the writers were straight, and it didn't cross their minds, then we should eternally punish homosexuals for that little error?

 

[Autodidact]

No but when things are alluded to, such as husband and wife etc, that's when you can start paying attention.

Well, many Christians here think you need to pay attention to what the Bible says, not what you want it to say. I gather you disagree. I think going from instructions to husbands and wives to a prohibition against homosexuality is a bit of a stretch.

 

[Father Heathen]

So what exactly is wrong with homosexuality that it should be forbidden by society? Can anyone give me a solid, rational answer beyond "an invisible sky daddy said so"? They don't breed? How is that a bad thing? Not natural? A lot of things humans do is not natural, like clothing, shaving, flight, wearing glasses and watching television.
And how does one choose what they find desirable and attractive? Does one choose what foods they like and dislike? Even if it was a choice, who cares? Does anyone have anything, anything at all, beyond kooky spooky superstition?

 

[Autodidact]

I think it's something like this, FH: Most cultures/tribes/religions have a set of taboos, or ritual purity rules. These usually involve food and sex, and sometimes clothing, washing and so forth. Judaism, being essentially an ancient tribal religion, has a lot of these, many of them listed in Leviticus. Many Christian sects seem to have inherited this set of sexual purity taboos, while rejecting the food-based ones. I have no idea why; it seems quite arbitrary to me. These taboos are deeply and sub-consciously ingrained in our society, as any good taboo should be. I don't think most Christians are even aware that's what it is, rather conceptualizing it as a moral issue, which obviously it isn't. That is, it has nothing to do with honesty, compassion, or other fundamental moral or ethical questions. It's just a remnant of an ancient purity tradition. That's what people mean when they say things like homosexuality is a sin, or unnatural, or even immoral. It's kind of like having sex with your sister or cannibalism--on that level. So it doesn't help much to point out that there's nothing immoral about it; it's operating on a deeper, more subconscious level than that.

 

[McBell]

So, you've just proved that the Bible preaches against homosexuality, but you seem to be ok with it. Contradictory maybe? yes, I mean naive. IMHO you may need to actually look at what Christianity says about homosexuals instead of just buying in to everything that people say is positive about it on her.

Interesting.
The verses in question say absolutely nothing about homosexuality.
In fact, they do not even hint to any thing homosexual.
Furthermore, it says right in the passage:

6 But I say this as a concession, not as a commandment.
​

IMHO you really need to stop putting what you want to read above and beyond what is actually written.

 

[McBell]

No but when things are alluded to, such as husband and wife etc, that's when you can start paying attention.

It is not alluded to.
It flat out says husband and wife.
What is does NOT mention is Homosexuality.
Does not mention it at all.
So ANYTHING you get from the verses in question concerning homosexuality is merely an assumption on your part.

 

[McBell]

oh, so you're what we would call a strict interpreter of things. If it doesn't expressly say it, then you can do it. If you were in my class I would have to specifically tell you not to hit someone in the face, because my rule of respect one another doesn't really tell you you can't do that. I see.

Oh, so you are we call a Calvinite.
You feel the need to try and make verses say things that do not.

The passage above is a prime example.
It has absolutely NOTHING to do with homosexuality, yet here you are Calvinizing it to be saying that homosexuality is bad.

 

[Tau]

I think it's something like this, FH: Most cultures/tribes/religions have a set of taboos, or ritual purity rules. These usually involve food and sex, and sometimes clothing, washing and so forth. Judaism, being essentially an ancient tribal religion, has a lot of these, many of them listed in Leviticus. Many Christian sects seem to have inherited this set of sexual purity taboos, while rejecting the food-based ones. I have no idea why; it seems quite arbitrary to me. These taboos are deeply and sub-consciously ingrained in our society, as any good taboo should be. I don't think most Christians are even aware that's what it is, rather conceptualizing it as a moral issue, which obviously it isn't. That is, it has nothing to do with honesty, compassion, or other fundamental moral or ethical questions. It's just a remnant of an ancient purity tradition. That's what people mean when they say things like homosexuality is a sin, or unnatural, or even immoral. It's kind of like having sex with your sister or cannibalism--on that level. So it doesn't help much to point out that there's nothing immoral about it; it's operating on a deeper, more subconscious level than that.

100% correct.