The bible and gays

[Deathbydefault]

I don't promote violence never have and never will. I don't hate others. I can't agree with sins that God says are sins that includes my own sins and I have a lot of them that I am daily working on. I am what you call a working progress but I got the winning side behind me. I also have no organization. I don't even go to church like I should. Everything I say is from my own walk with the Lord.

Christianity is as much an organization as it is a religion.
And I was asking if you will. If God came to you right now and asked that you be a soldier in the newest crusade, would you?
Would you kill for God if God demanded it of you?

Moreover than any of this, all you have is blind and irrational faith.
You have no evidence, no proof that you are on the winning side. None.
Not a single damn shred. This goes back to the playing chess with a pigeon thing.
No matter how much I tear you apart you'll just knock over all the pieces, crap on the board, and act like you've won.

 

[BenTheBeliever]

Christianity is as much an organization as it is a religion.
And I was asking if you will. If God came to you right now and asked that you be a soldier in the newest crusade, would you?
Would you kill for God if God demanded it of you?

Moreover than any of this, all you have is blind and irrational faith.
You have no evidence, no proof that you are on the winning side. None.
Not a single damn shred. This goes back to the playing chess with a pigeon thing.
No matter how much I tear you apart you'll just knock over all the pieces, crap on the board, and act like you've won.

First off God never ask us to kill. He makes it clear thou shall not kill. Second yes I do have proof. My daily life is proof. What someone thinks on a message board does not matter. What matters is I've seen God and I know he is real and I live for him. that is what matters to me. So you can take your anti Christ attuidte and try throwing it at another believer cause it will never work on this one

 

[Deathbydefault]

First off God never ask us to kill. He makes it clear thou shall not kill. Second yes I do have proof. My daily life is proof. What someone thinks on a message board does not matter. What matters is I've seen God and I know he is real and I live for him. that is what matters to me. So you can take your anti Christ attuidte and try throwing it at another believer cause it will never work on this one

First off, I believe in the original text "thou shalt not kill" actually translates to "thou shall not murder".
It doesn't matter if my arguments work against you. To me you'll just be another corpse in the dirt within 40 years.
A nobody face that has nothing to do with my life and believes something ridiculous based entirely on faith.

What you say doesn't matter to me either. Because you have nothing good to say.
Unlike you, I'm here to get my opinion swayed, to have my beliefs questioned.
I don't operate on blind faith, nor do I ever want to. And I think less of those whom do.
I'll say now that I do not believe you've seen anything such as God, and that you only think you know something,

My attitude, in concern to Christianity, is less anti-Christ and more anti-Christianity, just to clear that up.

 

[leibowde84]

When Adam and Eve made their poor choices it effect the rest of humanity. Just like if a person makes the choice to drink and get behind the wheel of a car their actions can effect other people.

This makes no sense. For your comparison to make any sense, the descendants of car accident victims would have to be physically harmed by car accidents that happened before they were born.

 

[BenTheBeliever]

First off, I believe in the original text "thou shalt not kill" actually translates to "thou shall not murder".
It doesn't matter if my arguments work against you. To me you'll just be another corpse in the dirt within 40 years.
A nobody face that has nothing to do with my life and believes something ridiculous based entirely on faith.

What you say doesn't matter to me either. Because you have nothing good to say.
Unlike you, I'm here to get my opinion swayed, to have my beliefs questioned.
I don't operate on blind faith, nor do I ever want to. And I think less of those whom do.
I'll say now that I do not believe you've seen anything such as God, and that you only think you know something,

My attitude, in concern to Christianity, is less anti-Christ and more anti-Christianity, just to clear that up.

What ever floats that boat of yours. As for me and my house hold we will live for the Lord [emoji1]

 

[Deathbydefault]

What ever floats that boat of yours. As for me and my house hold we will live for the Lord [emoji1]

Yeah, my parents thought the same way.
Guess who got kicked out the same day he turned 18?
Now guess why my posts are so aggressive.
Thirdly, guess why I was asking you how you knew anything.
And lastly, guess why your bigoted position holds no weight with any community other than your own.

 

[leibowde84]

When God created men IMO he never had it planned for adam and steve to fall in love. It was always supposed to be Adam and Eve. But Adam and Eve fell away from God and sin was born. God never wanted us to be like we are now. We humans made that choice. That does not mean that God does not love us. God is a merciful loving God but he is also a holy God and can not let sin into Heaven. That is why Jesus had to come. Only through the sacrifice that Christ had made on the cross for our sins can we truly be right in the father's eyes. Sin leads to death and always will lead to death. The cross leads to eternal life. Which road would you rather take? A road that leads to death and pain or a road that leads to eternal life and happiness? We each have to make that choice.

This is nothing but circular reasoning, though. You are assuming that God didn't intend for people to be gay because Scripture says that human beings "fell" from God and homosexuality was a consequence ... or, in other words, we went against God's intentions. Thus, you are saying that God didn't intend for people to be gay because God doesn't intend for people to be Gay. This doesn't provide any real reasoning.

 

[ether-ore]

This is nothing but circular reasoning, though. You are assuming that God didn't intend for people to be gay because Scripture says that human beings "fell" from God and homosexuality was a consequence ... or, in other words, we went against God's intentions. Thus, you are saying that God didn't intend for people to be gay because God doesn't intend for people to be Gay. This doesn't provide any real reasoning.

To many, the scriptures offer cohesive, coherent and therefore valid evidence that there is a God. With that understanding, the scriptures can also be said to reveal God's will. Since we are not given to 'know' all things yet, it is true that some of God's laws are taken on faith. But because of that cohesiveness and coherence we can know the reason for some things, one of which is that being gay is a manifestation of the mortal body and not in accordance with the will of God; but that it is one of the mortal challenges that need to be overcome. I have not been able to understand why the reasonableness of the scriptures appeals to some and not to others. I do understand that some will say that what the scriptures say is not reasonable. The only thing I can come up with is that it conflicts with the reasons for what they want, and they don't want to have to exercise descipline without hard proof that they need to. It seems what they cannot see is the valid necessity of faith during this mortal test.

 

[leibowde84]

To many, the scriptures offer cohesive, coherent and therefore valid evidence that there is a God. With that understanding, the scriptures can also be said to reveal God's will. Since we are not given to 'know' all things yet, it is true that some of God's laws are taken on faith. But because of that cohesiveness and coherence we can know the reason for some things, one of which is that being gay is a manifestation of the mortal body and not in accordance with the will of God; but that it is one of the mortal challenges that need to be overcome. I have not been able to understand why the reasonableness of the scriptures appeals to some and not to others. I do understand that some will say that what the scriptures say is not reasonable. The only thing I can come up with is that it conflicts with the reasons for what they want, and they don't want to have to exercise descipline without hard proof that they need to. It seems what they cannot see is the valid necessity of faith during this mortal test.

This is more circular reasoning, though. You are saying that faith is necessary to "know" (not the right word here, imho, as "believe" is more accurate) the will of God through scriptures because the scriptures create this caveat. Every religion makes claims of this nature about itself. So, it doesn't actually provide any reasoning.

In regards to acceptance of scripture as 100% accurate, my personal doubt (not in God but in those who claim to speak for God) is the history behind it. After studying the history of the New Testament for quite a while, I have come to the conclusion that the likelihood of human interference is too great. Too much "choice" was given to the early church leaders when Constantine demanded a single coherent scripture for Christianity. Politics seems to have played far too much of a role for my acceptance of scripture as perfect.

 

[ether-ore]

This is more circular reasoning, though. You are saying that faith is necessary to "know" (not the right word here, imho, as "believe" is more accurate) the will of God through scriptures because the scriptures create this caveat. Every religion makes claims of this nature about itself. So, it doesn't actually provide any reasoning.

In regards to acceptance of scripture as 100% accurate, my personal doubt (not in God but in those who claim to speak for God) is the history behind it. After studying the history of the New Testament for quite a while, I have come to the conclusion that the likelihood of human interference is too great. Too much "choice" was given to the early church leaders when Constantine demanded a single coherent scripture for Christianity. Politics seems to have played far too much of a role for my acceptance of scripture as perfect.

I concede that from your point of view what you say appears to be true. This is why I made the comment concerning the reasonableness of scripture. Some are able to see reasonableness in it and others cannot. I'm not sure why this disparity is the case. As I said, I think the scriptures are coherent, cohesive and therefore reasonable. Because of this, I believe I can have faith in things that are not readily apparent. For me, the key is to have an eternal perspective rather than a temporal one.
I also agree that it is much a matter of interpretation and this is where an eternal perspective comes in. I think one needs to be able to grasp a panoramic view of where we came from, why we are here and what can happen to us after we leave this mortal sphere of existence. When viewed this way, I think one can come to understand the why behind some of God's laws.
I also admit that the scriptures are less than perfect. I happen to believe that the Bible in particular has been tampered with for political reasons back in the day. Being LDS and having access to additional revelation, I can see more clearly what was intended. But you are right. It is all a matter of interpretation. All I can say about that is there was never a more critical issue concerning the welfare of souls than that a correct interpretation be made.

 

[leibowde84]

I concede that from your point of view what you say appears to be true. This is why I made the comment concerning the reasonableness of scripture. Some are able to see reasonableness in it and others cannot. I'm not sure why this disparity is the case. As I said, I think the scriptures are coherent, cohesive and therefore reasonable. Because of this, I believe I can have faith in things that are not readily apparent. For me, the key is to have an eternal perspective rather than a temporal one.
I also agree that it is much a matter of interpretation and this is where an eternal perspective comes in. I think one needs to be able to grasp a panoramic view of where we came from, why we are here and what can happen to us after we leave this mortal sphere of existence. When viewed this way, I think one can come to understand the why behind some of God's laws.
I also admit that the scriptures are less than perfect. I happen to believe that the Bible in particular has been tampered with for political reasons back in the day. Being LDS and having access to additional revelation, I can see more clearly what was intended. But you are right. It is all a matter of interpretation. All I can say about that is there was never a more critical issue concerning the welfare of souls than that a correct interpretation be made.

Fair enough. Thanks for your thoughtful comment.

 

[JoStories]

While I do think it necessary to discipline myself according to God's law (what you call hopping from one foot to the other) I don't actually believe in the roasting in hell bit. I do believe that unless a person repents, other than being resurrected, the atonement of Jesus Christ cannot be applied to that person and they will have to pay the penalty for their own sins. That paying for one's own sins has been likened to eternal flame, is just that... a simile or a metaphor. But I suspect it is not fun. I guess, based on your response though, you must really think you will be gay for eternity and that condition has nothing to do with the nature (or breathing) of your mortal body. OK.

Actually, no. I don't believe that I will be gay for eternity. I will be reincarnated however it works for my life path and my Dukkha. I may be gay, I may be celibate, as I am now. Who knows? What I was speaking of was in this lifetime. In this one, I am gay. And yes, it is as natural as breathing for me. I must confess that I really don't get the whole 'sin' thing. It simply has never made sense to me. We make mistakes. Hopefully, they are small ones like white lies or something stupid. I cannot for one second believe that my being bisexual is a mistake or sin. It is who and what I am. But what if I did lie and never said sorry. Your faith would have me in hell. And honestly, Either-Ore, do you really see that as tenable to an outsider viewing your faith?

 

[JoStories]

Hey now, let's not forget the children born only to die painfully over the course of days, months, or years.

Thank you Death. I had glossed over. But in my faith, there are reasons for that albeit difficult for me at times to digest. From the Christian POV, I see your point as it was mine as well.

 

[ether-ore]

Actually, no. I don't believe that I will be gay for eternity. I will be reincarnated however it works for my life path and my Dukkha. I may be gay, I may be celibate, as I am now. Who knows? What I was speaking of was in this lifetime. In this one, I am gay. And yes, it is as natural as breathing for me. I must confess that I really don't get the whole 'sin' thing. It simply has never made sense to me. We make mistakes. Hopefully, they are small ones like white lies or something stupid. I cannot for one second believe that my being bisexual is a mistake or sin. It is who and what I am. But what if I did lie and never said sorry. Your faith would have me in hell. And honestly, Either-Ore, do you really see that as tenable to an outsider viewing your faith?

I can only hope. I had a first cousin who died of complications due to aids. He was gay, but he was also an actor and a quite good one. He could tell the most entertaining and funny stories. At a family reunion once, he complained to me that he couldn't understand why the church did not accept him as he was. With that question it was evident that he did not understand the function of he church or the purpose of life; so yes I can understand why it would not seem tenable to you. There was no satisfactory answer for him either. It leaves me in despair. But I recognize there is nothing to be done by mere humans. Only God can intercede and since He perhaps considers that He already has (in scripture), for Him to do any more would violate man's agency; and that is something God will not do.

I am curious; on what do you base your belief in reincarnation? I mean besides being Buddhist. How did you come to the conclusion that multiple lives are a reality?

 

[sojourner]

Christianity is as much an organization as it is a religion.

All communities have some sort of organization. Jesus organized a community around disciples and other followers.

Would you kill for God if God demanded it of you?

The question is academic and moot, since the respondent's theological construction doesn't include a God who desires the death of others.

Moreover than any of this, all you have is blind and irrational faith.

A ballsy statements from one whose knowledge of the person in question is so limited that I doubt you know enough about his faith to make such an assessment.

You have no evidence, no proof that you are on the winning side. None.

"Winning side?" There are no winners or losers, because there are no "sides."
BTW: What "evidence" do you think ought to be available?

This goes back to the playing chess with a pigeon thing.
No matter how much I tear you apart you'll just knock over all the pieces, crap on the board, and act like you've won.

What on earth would compel you to "tear" anyone "apart?" That's awfully aggressive, don't you think?

It doesn't matter if my arguments work against you. To me you'll just be another corpse in the dirt within 40 years.
A nobody face that has nothing to do with my life and believes something ridiculous based entirely on faith.

Yet, we are all members of the same human family. I'd say that, alone, has something to do with "your" life, yes?
(Just remember, you will also be a "faceless, nobody corpse" one day.)
What makes a certain belief "ridiculous," do you think? What makes that belief any more ridiculous than the ridiculous belief that 1) your life is your own, and 2) people don't matter?

What you say doesn't matter to me either.

I'd say that this statement is at least partially untrue. What he said matters enough to you that you bothered to post this diatribe, so, obviously, what he's said has gotten to you in some way, in order to inspire such a response.

Unlike you, I'm here to get my opinion swayed, to have my beliefs questioned.

Yet, you put up fences of aggression, closed-mindedness and sarcasm. Not a good practice to achieve the objective of having one's opinions swayed and one's beliefs questioned.

I don't operate on blind faith, nor do I ever want to.

Judging by this statement, you're opting, instead, for some informed faith. What faith would that be?

And I think less of those whom do.

You're blindly judging what sort of faith the respondent embraces. Do you think less of yourself for being so blind?

I'll say now that I do not believe you've seen anything such as God, and that you only think you know something,

Of course, by your own criteria, what you "believe" isn't cogent to anything approaching reality. This belief of yours is a blind belief. you only think you know what he knows.




You can begin "thinking less of yourself" any time now.

My attitude, in concern to Christianity, is less anti-Christ and more anti-Christianity, just to clear that up.

Obviously, you don't know enough about Christianity to form an opinion that matters. If you did, you'd realize that Christianity is inseparable from Christ, since the church is the Body of Christ. to reject Christianity is to reject Christ.

Yeah, my parents thought the same way.
Guess who got kicked out the same day he turned 18?
Now guess why my posts are so aggressive.

Your parents are not indicative of the religion as a whole.
Your situation is not indicative of that of the rest of the world.

Thirdly, guess why I was asking you how you knew anything.

Ummmmm... because you're bitter?

And lastly, guess why your bigoted position holds no weight with any community other than your own.

It's supposed to hold weight outside his community? Really? What makes you think so?

 

[sojourner]

To many, the scriptures offer cohesive, coherent and therefore valid evidence that there is a God. With that understanding, the scriptures can also be said to reveal God's will. Since we are not given to 'know' all things yet, it is true that some of God's laws are taken on faith. But because of that cohesiveness and coherence we can know the reason for some things, one of which is that being gay is a manifestation of the mortal body and not in accordance with the will of God; but that it is one of the mortal challenges that need to be overcome. I have not been able to understand why the reasonableness of the scriptures appeals to some and not to others. I do understand that some will say that what the scriptures say is not reasonable. The only thing I can come up with is that it conflicts with the reasons for what they want, and they don't want to have to exercise descipline without hard proof that they need to. It seems what they cannot see is the valid necessity of faith during this mortal test.

What "cohesiveness" and "coherence" leads you to believe that homosexuality is not as valid a part of the human condition, not as available for spiritual depth as the alternative, and not "in accordance" with God's will? Does heterosexuality need to be "overcome?"

"The only thing [you] can come up with?" What of the possibility that you're just not executing the texts correctly, and that your hermeneutic is skewed by your own limitations?

 

[sojourner]

This is why I made the comment concerning the reasonableness of scripture. Some are able to see reasonableness in it and others cannot.

What "reasonableness" denies full humanity to some?

As I said, I think the scriptures are coherent, cohesive and therefore reasonable. Because of this, I believe I can have faith in things that are not readily apparent. For me, the key is to have an eternal perspective rather than a temporal one.

That cohesiveness and reasonableness, though, are colored by the individual's ability to understand the scope of each. An "eternal perspective" would never seek to dehumanize anyone.

I also agree that it is much a matter of interpretation and this is where an eternal perspective comes in. I think one needs to be able to grasp a panoramic view of where we came from, why we are here and what can happen to us after we leave this mortal sphere of existence. When viewed this way, I think one can come to understand the why behind some of God's laws.

A panoramic view includes all human beings, in whatever normal way they express themselves.

All I can say about that is there was never a more critical issue concerning the welfare of souls than that a correct interpretation be made.

The bible is available for multiple interpretations.

 

[sojourner]

he complained to me that he couldn't understand why the church did not accept him as he was. With that question it was evident that he did not understand the function of he church or the purpose of life

What is the "evident" function of the church? What is the "evident" purpose of life?

 

[Nada]

Why is the bible homophobic

It is not.It just tells that this kind of lifestyle is not a normal one.Those who are gay, or know people who are gay, and agree with them, are the ones who call it homophobic.

 

[ether-ore]

What "cohesiveness" and "coherence" leads you to believe that homosexuality is not as valid a part of the human condition, not as available for spiritual depth as the alternative, and not "in accordance" with God's will? Does heterosexuality need to be "overcome?"

"The only thing [you] can come up with?" What of the possibility that you're just not executing the texts correctly, and that your hermeneutic is skewed by your own limitations?

Wow, but aren't you the articulate one? I am impressed. Anyway, I believe that same sex attraction is part of the human condition. As I said earlier, I believe this physical body does indeed have innate desires which may predispose it to homosexuality, perhaps even genetically predisposed. In terms of my understanding what that means for a being who existed as a spirit before coming to earth to gain a physical body for the first time is that that individual has a significant hurdle to overcome if he wishes to achieve the goal God desires for him.
As I interpret the text (in spite of my limitations) heterosexuality does need to be overcome if it is not restricted to the bonds of marriage between a man and a woman. The overall plan of happiness that has its outline in scripture and tells us where and who we came from and why we are here in mortality The coherence and cohesiveness of that story gives it credibility to some. The scriptures that proclaim against homosexuality combined with the overview of God's intended progress for His children are justification enough for me to say that homosexuality is not in accordance with God's will.
I merely state these things. I recognize that homosexuality will exist in spite of my opinions. All that is left is for me to mourn.