-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
A wise man once said that you can only interpret the Bible to mean whatever you want if you have no character. Yes, there is a meaning to the Bible that for the most part is not totally ambigious
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I don't believe America is a majority Christian nation
- Thread starter -Peacemaker-
- Start date
A wise man once said that you can only interpret the Bible to mean whatever you want if you have no character. Yes, there is a meaning to the Bible that for the most part is not totally ambigious
I so disagree.
The Bible, to the extent that it is unambiguous, is not much good.
The Bible, to the extent that it is unambiguous, is not much good.
McBell
Unbound
Well, first you will have to come to some sort of agreement as to what Jesus actually taught.
Good luck with that....
Really?
Why, cause they do not fit into your little "Christian" box?
Tell me, are you one of those egomaniacs who thinks their "definition" of Christian is the only God Approved version?
Is that the best you got?
Seems to me you did not think this through very well.
McBell
Unbound
the fact there are over 100,000 denominations of Christianity shows this is just plain flat out not true.
Care to try again?
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
Christianity can be stripped down to its bare essentials. The apostles' creed is a great example of that. When we do that we see a lot of agreement among denominations.
McBell
Unbound
So WHO gets to decide what Jesus did and did not teach?
I bet you would disagree with some other Christians who would disagree with you and yet others....
So until you can get an agreement of what was taught, you are merely blowing smoke
There is actually quite a lot of merit in accepting the responsibility of deciding what is valid and what is not.
At least if that is done in a sober enough way to understand that those who have divergent understandings will often be sincere enough by their turn.
At least if that is done in a sober enough way to understand that those who have divergent understandings will often be sincere enough by their turn.
David M
Well-Known Member
Perhaps you would like to quote Jesus' teachings about homosexuality, rather than whats in the bits of the bible that are not about what he taught.
Using such polls is fairly pointless as various denominations don't agree on how the bible is interpreted on such issues.
For instance the Catholic Church has a solid history of not allowing divorce, many of the protestant denominations generally are ok with it.
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
Jesus doesn't mention it specifically however he does exhort people to avoid sexual immorality. We get the definition of that in the OT including specific prohibition of homosexuality in Leviticus. Jesus quotes the OT including Leviticus meaning that he considers it authoritative. Jesus claims that he did not come to abolish the law but to fulfill. It would be fair to say that he amends it in a few specific circumstances, notably in terms of how sinners are punished. He doesn't actually change the OT definition of sin however. As far as biblical arguments go that's about as good as it gets short of specifically calling something out. The argument that Jesus would've supported homosexual behavior is pretty dishonest to tell you the truth. If someone wants to support homosexual behavior it would be better for them to just say "you know what? Jesus just isn't for me" than to teach falsely about him.
Matthew 15: 19"For out of the heart come evil thoughts--murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander."
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." Matthew 5:17
Jesus even says that he didn't have time to tell his disciples everything
John 16: 12"I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. 13But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come."
Last edited:
I find it rather difficult to take any religious idea that disapproves of homosexuality seriously, truth be told.
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
Here's Jesus' thoughts on marriage:
Matthew 19
3Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?" 4"Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,'5and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'?6So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate."
It's not reasonable to expect Jesus to address every f'ed up concoction of sexual sin and then ,when he doesn't, assume that he permits it
Matthew 19
3Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?" 4"Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,'5and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'?6So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate."
It's not reasonable to expect Jesus to address every f'ed up concoction of sexual sin and then ,when he doesn't, assume that he permits it
Is it reasonable instead to assume that he would disapprove of people to care and be dedicate to each other just because?
I must say, you are presenting a rather unflattering portrayal of Jesus.
I could address the meaning and scope of that verse, but that is really rather secondary.
I must say, you are presenting a rather unflattering portrayal of Jesus.
I could address the meaning and scope of that verse, but that is really rather secondary.
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
The portrayal of Jesus that I'm giving is one of a teacher that requires an extreme level of discipline and self-denial. If does not wish to live that type of life I can easily see how this could be seen as "unflattering"
Then the question becomes unavoidable: why would anyone believe in the existence of such a being, let alone perceive him as a teacher worth listening to?
Faith is IMO no excuse for avoiding basic moral reason.
I'm assuming you're straight, so that's easy for you to say. I'm also assuming that you were a virgin before marrying, if you are married.
Let me get this straight: you actually believe that the Old Testament is a book with an ounce of moral authority? The book that reveres a vengeful, merciless god (in my understanding of the texts) who committed genocide according to that very book's text? And you want to cite this book as an authority on why millions of people should be denied the right to have loving, consensual relationships.
Talk about laughable and pitiful.
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
This really gets to the heart of the matter. I think there are people out there who would like to know Jesus but won't commit to him because they feel they are condemning themselves to a life of deprivation and pain. Jesus addresses this as well.
Matthew 19:26 (KJV)
"But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, with men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible."
Matthew 6
25 “Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothes? 26 Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they? 27 Can any one of you by worrying add a single hour to your life
28 “And why do you worry about clothes? See how the flowers of the field grow. They do not labor or spin. 29 Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. 30 If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will he not much more clothe you—you of little faith? 31 So do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ 32 For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. 33 But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. 34 Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.
Jesus promises that we will be fed. He doesn't say how but he says it will happen if we seek his kingdom. He calls people to trust him enough to believe that promise.
Last edited:
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Or we could assume he got the important things off his chest, in which violence, exploitation, hording, and wealth seem to be his biggest issues he has with us.
That really has nothing to do with what I said. I was pointing out that it's easy for straight people to hate on homosexuality and place all sorts of unrealistic demands on gays that they, themselves, could not live up to. Anti-gay religions offer two options for gays: be celibate or try to change your sexual orientation. Both of those are unrealistic and not worth bothering with. Only a person who hates themselves would bother joining such a religion.
Meanwhile straight people have sex outside of marriage, sleep around, cheat on each other, create broken homes and single parents, abort their children, etc. The Duggars are an example of that. Hypocrisy.
Last edited:
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
It has everything to do with what you said. First of all it's the Christian God that makes those demands. Second of all he says those demands are realistic through his strength. This has nothing to do with what straight people hate or don't hate or what demands they might make. Who cares what people think? If God is real people should care what he thinks, not the opinion of mortals.