Relate that to Jude 1:7.
Lol. Full of yourself, much? Attacking the poster only weakens your argument.
-
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!
The Bible is gay
- Thread starter Spiderman
- Start date
Lol. Full of yourself, much? Attacking the poster only weakens your argument.
I had a feeling you'd say that.
The two verses in Leviticus aren't about promiscuity or lust.
Spiderman
Veteran Member
In that case, I owe you an apology as well.
God bless you!
Most people at RF do not apologize, so I really appreciate it.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Jude 1 lifts up the sexual immorality that was a direct result of the populace being unwilling to follow the law of hospitality (which included protecting strangers), as a way to equate it with the type of immorality present in the context the writer is addressing. He’s not addressing what the sin of Sodom actually was, so the verse doesn’t support your argument. If you want to know what the sin of Sodom is, you need to read... Genesis, and then Ezekiel.
Lol, not full of myself; I just happen to have taken advantage of an education that taught how to read the Bible honestly and effectively. If you’d done that, you would have exegeted Jude and not made the embarrassing error you made. That’s what weakens an argument: arguing from hubris that comes from ignorance of the subject matter one’s attempting to use as evidence for one’s position.
Last edited:
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Sure they are. See my response above. You have to know how to exegete the texts in order to know what’s being said. Leviticus refers most likely to either rape (which has nothing to do with orientation) or prostitution, both of which exhibit promiscuity and lust. But what makes the act abominable isn’t the “fact” that it’s inherently immoral. You have to dig deeper into the culture. In that culture honor and shame were embedded in gender identity. Males embodied honor and females embodied shame. It was considered shameful for a male to “take it like a woman,” so that male wasn’t operating out of his inherent honor. It was also considered shameful for a man to treat another man as an inferior, so that one was, likewise, not operating out of his inherent honor. That’s the abomination. Since those conditions aren’t inherent in our culture, the “abomination” does not apply to us.
Some of your colleagues would call that “justification.” I call it “an honest reading of the text.” That honest reading is one of the benefits of a graduate education in the Bible. Y’all can diss it if you want; they censured Galileo for saying the earth was not the center of the universe, too...
Last edited:
Spiderman
Veteran Member
I hope to be more respectful of God. I hope and pray that I could be.
God bless you! God loves you!
Please!
Christendom has been using exegesis of Scripture to justify supporting and joining their respective nations in killing others. As American pastor Harry Emerson Fosdick wrote in “The Modern Use of the Bible” (no less):
“Even in our churches we have put the battle flags. . . . With one corner of our mouth we have praised the Prince of Peace and with the other we have glorified war.”
And most also teach that Jesus is God. Lol.
You’d think that by putting Jesus in God’s place, they’d endeavor to be more obedient to Jesus’ commands to ‘love their brother’ and to ‘love their enemy.’ — John 13:34-35; Matthew 5:44; John 15:14-17; cf. 1 John 3:10-15
Their fruitage destroys any credibility they have in teaching God’s Word. Titus 1:16
And you were taught by them!
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
And this rant has ... what, exactly, to do with exegeting the texts correctly? Just because you disagree with it doesn’t mean it’s wrong. And it’s a darn sight better than making up apologetic drivel on the fly...
Spiderman
Veteran Member
Who accused you of being a rat?
Do you think having God’s spirit is important to understanding His Word properly?
Jesus did. — Luke 10:22.
Who do you think understood the Scriptures better: the educated Pharisees, or Christ’s apostle-fishermen?
You may think that my previous post has no bearing on the subject, but as per Scripture it really does!
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
The Jews would tell you that the Pharisees obviously did, for the apostles mistook Jesus for the Messiah. I would point out that “Christ’s apostle-fishermen” had the very unique benefit of sitting at Jesus’ actual feet and learning from one who was a credentialed scholar. I think they learned what this scholar-clergyperson taught them. The “educated Pharisees” still know, on average, more about the Judaic texts than we do. And modern “apostle-fishermen” do well to sit at the feet of actual, credentialed scholars and learn from them.
BilliardsBall
Veteran Member
Again, you are highly confused. There are women who judge Israel and get glory for battles won! This exceeds the rest of the ANE and most of the modern world, too! There are entire books like RUTH and ESTHER extolling female heroes of faith!
Spiderman
Veteran Member
I've read Ruth and Esther.
They were nothing like Moses, Elijah, Ezekial, Samuel, Elisha, or the apostles.
Yes, Queen Esther is my favorite Old Testament you figure.
But where did she work anything that would be classified as a scientific miracle?
Throughout the Bible God favors men over women so much that it is not even close to being subtle.
BilliardsBall
Veteran Member
So is your problem that you don't like homosexuals, which is a false belief, or is it that God gives multiple indicators that the Christ child will be a MALE?