Posted May 3, '13 at 3:04pm
How do you know that Eve wasn't a sissyboy, or that Adam wasn't a bull dyke?
That phrase appears nowhere in the bible, in absolutely no translation.
Even god's for legalizing it now.
And, unfortunately, how the church loves its altar boys.
So you believe in an all-powerful being who can be disobeyed.
Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whoever thou art, that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest, doest the same things.
Posted May 3, '13 at 5:28pm
You realize there's tons of polygamy in there, right?
Posted May 3, '13 at 5:38pm
Honestly, this argument can't be touched. When you say, "It's wrong because God said it's wrong," there's really nothing anyone can say to change your opinion about this specific topic. Sure, we can debate the validity of the bible, but then we go into a completely different topic.
The problem with Christians who are against homosexuality is that they believe it's wrong simply because God said it was wrong. Why is God against homosexuality? Who knows, but he is, therefore it's wrong.
Then, you have people who try to justify why homosexuality is a sin. These people COMPLETELY ignore reality. They will argue that a child needs to be raised by both a mother and a father. For example, a boy needs to have a male role model. And as much as this makes sense in our heads, it's just not reality. Plenty of boys grow up without a male figure in the house. The problem is when children grow up with only a single parent.
The saddest thing is when you show people evidence that homosexual parents can raise children, and the evidence is just ignored. In a different forum, someone said "I looked through all the sources, and they were all referencing studies..." Well, gee, isn't that the point? "... and all these studies were hand picked and therefore were biased." What a cop out! Sadly, I was banned by a lying moderator, but that's neither here nor there.
I guess my point is this. If you think homosexuality is a sin because God willed it to be a sin, fair enough. But if you think gay marriage or even homosexuality in general should be banned because of your religion, then you're stepping into the grounds of forcing your religious beliefs on other people, which is not cool. But regardless, those who see homosexuality as a sin don't really have a good reason.
Posted May 3, '13 at 6:50pm
I did. He continuously ignored it
And marriage's roots aren't for bringing a couple together as one..but as a bargaining means in a trade, a way to keep peace between different tribes, etc
Posted May 4, '13 at 12:57am
Wow. I guess my comment sparked something. I'll try to respond to everything brought to me, and I'll start at the ones posted most recently after mine. I just want to note that I will be answering using the Bible as a reference, and if there is anyone else out there who agrees with me, speak up.
"Do not practice homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman. It is a detestable sin." Leviticus 18:22
Ah, actually it states that they could take(not buy) slaves from conquered countries. And in case you don't think that's any better(I know I wouldn't), let me quickly say that in the way 'slave' is used, it is more like servent. Also, there was a law then saying that they had to be freed after 7 years, thus pretty much removing the meaning of slavery as you are thinking.
By no means. It says that a rapist must be stoned to death. You may be mistaking it for another verse that says that when two unmarried people have sex outside of marriage, they must marry.
[qutoe]People made marriage. The idea of joining two people together in some sort of ceremony has arisen in many different areas across the world independently.
Since I'm using the Bible to prove my points, I'll tell you that every human originated in the same place. The Garden of Eden. Thus, when God created the concept of marriage(by creating one man and one woman, and telling them to "Be fruitful and multiply"), it was brought to the different places in the world by different cultures who had come from the same place, and had the concept of marriage handed down through the generations.
Ah, I think you're getting the picture, but not exactly as I intended.
Reason: God created man. Then he created woman to be his helper and companion. He didn't create another man because Adam was a man, and already had what he needed. Eve was a woman and as you know, there are definate differences between men and women, not just physical. You probably already know that.
Second: He did say it was wrong. When there was only one man and one woman, there wasn't really any possible way for there to be homosexuality. In the verse mentioned above, God clearly states that it is wrong.
Third: When sin entered the world, life got harder.
Wearing the clothes of the opposite sex is denying your own gender. Again it may be a personal struggle.
The first is pretty obvious, the second is more interesting.
Now, it says that "though they discipline him, he will not listen", which means that the parents had already tried to stop him. And mulitple times he doesn't stop. Also, this isn't a little thing such as poking his sister, or getting into a small argument, or even hitting someone. This is the blatent disobedience of a young adult(18-25) towards the patriarch. And the sin probably isn't a small thing. It says "a glutton and a drunkard", and not just someone who enjoys his food, but closer to someone who will sin during their drunkenness.
Well, if any Christain gay supporter will tell their interpretation, I'm all ears.
I'm not sure exactly what you mean by that, so I can't really answer.
Ah, there it is. I apoligize for paraphrasing.
If you want you can interpret that differently, but I'm not sure how.
I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion after I said "In the book of Leviticus, he says that both people practicing homosexuality would be immediately stoned", so I can't answer that one either because I don't understand where you got that.
If you are referring to incidents where certain sins are commited against them, I can't help you there. I will admit that a very large amount of people who are put in a position of power in a church(such as pastor or bishop) abuse that position and commit sins. It seems like you're saying that God is wrong because a human sinned.
Yes I do. But that does not diminish His power. The reason He allows humans to disobey Him on Earth is to give us a choice.
Well, sorry that I've only managed to answer four people, but my fingers are getting numb. I'll try to get back to the rest of you shortly.
Posted May 4, '13 at 1:19am
It depends on the translation.
All evidence available points to there being no supernatural deities of any sort. I'm open to being convinced otherwise, if proof can be provided.
That doesn't mean it's the word of God. Nor does it make the information inside of it any more moral or correct.
I'll gloss over a lot of the details and leave it at this:
1) It is biologically impossible for two people to produce the entire population we see today.
Here's the thing.
You don't get to use the bible to prove your points. The bible is not proof of your points. The bible is where you are getting your points from. Using the bible to 'prove' your points is called circular reasoning, wherein you cite the source as a reference to its own validity.
I'm right because I'm right because I'm right because I'm right, ad infinitum.
Why? For what possible reason could it be wrong? Because it wasn't intended? That's a ridiculous reason to call something a sin.
This is a red herring. Homosexuality is a consensual act between two adults of the same gender. Neither party is harmed. Thievery is when one person takes another's lawful property. There is nothing to compare between them.
Why is homosexuality worthy of death? On what grounds does God determine that it's such a heinous deed?
Harking back to Adam and Eve, it is God's fault sin entered the world. He left two people, completely ignorant of right and wrong, within reach of the ridiculously unnecessary tree and then let Satan into the garden to convince them to eat it. This is the same as an adult knowingly leaving a two year old next to a loaded gun and having a sadistic psychopath sibling stay to teach them how to hold it to their head and pull the trigger.
Posted May 4, '13 at 2:26am
Can you prove that Adam was neither a transman nor a "b*tch"? Can you prove that eve was neither a transwoman nor a bull dyke?
Line relates to extramarital lust. Homosexuality is mentioned no-where in that line.
You haven't proved that he's in the right to begin with.
He's all powerful, and yet creates a world which he knows ahead of time will be imperfect, being omniscient. He knows, being all knowing, the consequences of his every action. He knows how all of human history will unfold, and he knows how and what could be different. And yet some how, when he creates a being that he knows will disobey him, and he knows what he could have done different to make that being not disobey him, he punishes that very being for disobeying him, an act which he foretold and which only happened because he caused it to happen
Don't you see you pointless your god is? If your god created everything, and is thus the cause of everything, then he is ultimately responsible for everything, including the people disobeying him.
Posted May 4, '13 at 2:41am
Which laws in Leviticus do you choose to follow? Ever eat pork? Shave? Wear clothing with blended fibers? Eat lobster/shrimp/crab? Do any work on the Sabbath?
Actually, it states the following:
KJV: 44 Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. 45 Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. 46 And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.
Please find where it says that.
The related quote he's thinking of is somewhere in Exodus, but that's about the consented act.
The difference is homosexuals aren't causing inequity to others, while kleptos are.
If that's really what it means, why doesn't it just say "Men who strike their parents"?
No, learn to restrict the booze and teach moderation. Simple as that.
Your original quote was that God specifically said it as His law. This quote isn't claimed to be from Him.
Lev 18 talks about that.
Posted May 4, '13 at 4:08am
There are differences. For one, homosexuality doesn't harm anyone, while stealing does. That reason is already enough to not put those two on the same shelf.
You realize women wearing trousers are in that category, right? I don't see christians running around stoning half of the human population.
Nowhere does it say in which way the disobedience occurs. Being a glutton and a drunkard is not the same as disobedience and here sounds like some random addon to the parents' rant.
In both examples with the clothing and the youth, you could say that is because it applies to the time when such things where different. Fair enough. But then why don't you say the same for homosexuality? Just beware not to pick out only parts of the bible when you're using it to argue something.
Posted May 4, '13 at 5:41am
I have to reiterate what Nemo asked. Why does God find this detestable and an offense to himself?
You may want to read through the Bible cover to cover for your self instead of just getting your information from whoever you're listening to on this.
No it's not. For example the earliest versions of the Gospel of Mark that we have stop at Jesus dying on the cross with no mention of his resurrection. There are plenty more examples like this as well.
The Bible is the claim you need to prove.
So who did Cain marry?
genetically the human race starting from just two people wouldn't be possible. By this evidence alone we can dismiss this event as false.
God didn't make me. I was a product of of an egg and sperm coming together forming a zygote which continued to develop into the present sate that I'm in now. It's all a genetic process that we have a pretty firm understanding of. Not once do we need to include a deity for this process to occur.
One is doing harm to others without consent while the other is not doing harm to another and has consent.
It was actually quite common to do in the past. for instance my grandfather when he was little wore his sisters hand-me-down dress. There is even a picture of this. If you like I will try to find it and post it.
No it doesn't. I see o reason why the age would make a difference.
Interestingly the word for glutton here "zalal" would likely be better translated "to mean be worthless". Now drunkard could be an accurate word to use given this refers to "a drink, liquor".
It also says a marriage fits these parameters as well.
God: Stone your son to death.
I have to be given reason to believe this God exists in the first place. Then after that I would have to determine if this God is even worth following. If his God does exist and is just as the Bible describes, this God is nothing more than a monster with power and not worthy of anyone's devotion.