-
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!
Same Sex Marrige By a Church.
- Thread starter Archer
- Start date
all doctrine is based on interpretation and scholarly opinion. To leave that out is to leave out doctrine. Not to mention in this day and age the scholars are really the only ones who have taken the time and effort to read and understand the bible in it's original language and context, two things I imagine would be vitally important in terms of determining bible doctrine.
How can something based on scripture not be an interpretation?
All Bibles should have these references BTW
Storm
ThrUU the Looking Glass
"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."
Matthew 7:2-4 (New International Version)
2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
3"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye?"
Matthew 7:2-4 (New International Version)
2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
3"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye?"
It is fumy if I ask a question that you cant answer and off of the wall crap is pulled. It is not in the bible. If anyone can find it in a legitimate biblical translation of what was in the cannon I will never post on this forum again otherwise stop wasting time.
@Storm I never cast a stone. I asked if it could be found in the Bible. Do you fear one who is following the Lord so much that you must try and make a mockery of them?
@Storm I never cast a stone. I asked if it could be found in the Bible. Do you fear one who is following the Lord so much that you must try and make a mockery of them?
archer what do you think is more important in determining bible doctrine... what the bible says in it's english translation or what the bible says in it's original language?
I'm asking this because the reason there are so many english translations of the bible is because many of the words in the bible's original language have no english translation or have multiple english translations. As such one translation may say that homosexuality is bad when the word that was translated into homosexuality could have also been translated into homosexual prostitution, or a different translation of the context around that statement could specify that homosexuality is only bad when done in temple rituals and sex rites.
You also have to take into account that the english translations are not necessarily direct from the original language but are translations of translations of translations, so much like a game of telephone the final message can easily wind up very different from the original. Indeed many scholars state that in the original language of the bible there was no word for homosexual and as such the english translations that use that word are actually misinterpretations.
I'm asking this because the reason there are so many english translations of the bible is because many of the words in the bible's original language have no english translation or have multiple english translations. As such one translation may say that homosexuality is bad when the word that was translated into homosexuality could have also been translated into homosexual prostitution, or a different translation of the context around that statement could specify that homosexuality is only bad when done in temple rituals and sex rites.
You also have to take into account that the english translations are not necessarily direct from the original language but are translations of translations of translations, so much like a game of telephone the final message can easily wind up very different from the original. Indeed many scholars state that in the original language of the bible there was no word for homosexual and as such the english translations that use that word are actually misinterpretations.
Even the most ardent Biblical inerrantist doesn't go by a strict literal translation. Do you think John 21:15 ("... feed my lambs") is a call to ministry or to animal husbandry?
And if you can find a translation of the Bible that supports or condones the subject, you still have just an opinion.
However, to indulge you, how about these:
1 Timothy 4:1-3 (NASB):
Now... I agree that this is a bit ambivalent. It does declare that there will be men who are deceived by demons and liars into forbidding marriage to someone, but it doesn't specify which men or which marriages.
So, with that in mind, how about the classic 1 John 4:16:
The meaning I draw from this verse is that things based in love are godly. Would you agree?
Would you also agree that this means that if same-sex attraction is based in love, then it is godly?
her point wasn't to mock archer. It was to point out that the bible states you should not worry about fixing other people until you have fixed yourself, in that sense you have no right biblically to stand against or condemn a christian church that wishes to wed same sex couples because doing so would be "casting a stone" at them and "trying to remove the speck from their eye". It may not specifically permit the wedding of same sex couples in a christian church but it does mean that others have no biblical support for condemning those churches or calling them "un-christian" if they do.
Storm
ThrUU the Looking Glass
Refraining from judgment and showing compassion most definitely are "in the Bible."
Promises, promises.
In shunning "sinners" you most certainly do.
Back to bluster, are we? It's most unbecoming.
You're not following the Lord, you're presuming to speak for Him.
I can see your points but as you said nothing. As to point 1 do you not see that as stating the wrong and not condoning? I mean really it is condemning scripture.
Allowed by whom? It does seem that you wish that you could disallow this, but even though you are a Christian you do not personally have the authority to disallow this practice for other churches. In fact nobody has the authority to disallow this practice for other churches, at least not in a free society.
If you are living in the U.S. then the only relevant doctrine in determining what a church is allowed to do is the first amendment of the constitution. I live in Canada and our Charter of Rights is the relevant doctrine here.
Now you may personally believe that Christian churches that perform same sex marriages are wrong, but the fact is that they have an absolute right to be wrong. As do you.
Last edited:
archer in another thread you said that the bible is basically silent on the matter of abortion and as such you refer to your own feelings as to whether or not you support it. So why then when it comes to same sex marriage in the church do you say the bible must eplicitly support it in order for it to be permissable? For you see the bible is completely silent on matters of same-sex marriage. Even if you go only by the english translation which does seem to condemn homosexuality itself it gives no basis for refusing same sex marriage. So then shouldn't a church be able to defer to their own feelings on the matter just as you defer to your own feelings in regards to abortion? After all a church could easily take the quotes that storm and 9-10ths posted and say that they will marry same sex couples on the grounds that all forms of love are godly and even if god himself does not like the idea of homosexuality it is not up to them to try and cast stones at homosexuals or try and remove the specks from their eyes by opposing their relationships.
edit: oh and by the way scholars are largely in agreement in that the king james version is outdated and largely unreliable as a bible translation
edit: oh and by the way scholars are largely in agreement in that the king james version is outdated and largely unreliable as a bible translation
Last edited:
Wrong I asked a question about the Bible. None can prove the Bible wrong with the Bible so therefore this will be nothing but a shouting match. The way I see it is I am not speaking for God storm, I am defending my faith! You can try and show me what is not there.
It is not biblical.
The letters of Paul address these things as well including Homosexuality.
Satan know the scriptures well my friends but my Faith in God is such that his deciles are trying to fool me.
Are you saying you see us as disciples of satan?
The Bible explicitly condems Homosexuality Old and New testament I defer to the new testament:
[FONT=Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica]Romans 1:18-28
18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness,
19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.
20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.
22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools
23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.
24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.
25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator--who is forever praised. Amen.
26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones.
27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.
28 Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. [/FONT] [FONT=Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica]Romans 2:1
You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica]I Corinthians 6:9-10
9 Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders
10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica]I Corinthians 6:19-20
19 Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;
20 you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body. [/FONT]
It's not. Apparently it's not bad, but there are more accurate translations out there.
Have a look at these threads:
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/biblical-debates/68882-how-accurate-kjv-scholarly-view.html
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/biblical-debates/25933-kjv-good-translation.html
BTW - you'll see a lot of posts by angellous_evangellous in those threads. He's in the process of doing his PhD in New Testament studies and has quite a bit of experience on this issue, so I'm personally inclined to give his opinion a lot of weight.
That depends on your point of view. The Bible gives quite a bit of support to virtue in general, so whether you think it supports homosexual marriage will depend on whether you see virtue in it... but your opinion in that regard will have come from your own assessment, not the Bible.
Disciples no I do not think you evil though his purposes you seem to serve at times. Perhaps just playing devils advocate.