A High Quality Case for Christians to Not Condemn Homosexuality by John Shore

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2012 2:50 AM GMT
    http://johnshore.com/2012/04/02/the-best-case-for-the-bible-not-condemning-homosexuality/
  • calibro

    Posts: 8888

    Apr 05, 2012 9:26 AM GMT
    look, you can put all the lipstick you want on this pig. the truth is the bible says being gay is a sin. you can twist it all you want, but it's pretty clear.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2012 9:42 AM GMT
    ...and it is ok to have slaves and kill your wife for having an affair.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2012 9:52 AM GMT
    calibro saidlook, you can put all the lipstick you want on this pig. the truth is the bible says being gay is a sin. you can twist it all you want, but it's pretty clear.


    Post-Biblical Christianity, then, Calibro.

    There was Christianity before the canonical Bible.
    There will be Christianity after the canonical Bible.

    Now that I'm wrapping up the second edition of The Greatest Bible Study in Historical Accuracy, I'm prepared to accept Christianity having foundations on books of [library of/Bible of] knowledge viewed in a better light (historical accuracy) and new books of knowledge. My current first edition is like a pencil sketch of the oil painting that follows.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2012 9:54 AM GMT
    calibro saidlook, you can put all the lipstick you want on this pig. the truth is the bible says being gay is a sin. you can twist it all you want, but it's pretty clear.


    That's far from the truth.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2012 10:42 AM GMT
    calibro saidlook, you can put all the lipstick you want on this pig. the truth is the bible says being gay is a sin. you can twist it all you want, but it's pretty clear.


    I don't agree. It all depends on how you interpret the texts commonly used against homosexual acts among men. (Technically, lesbianism could be allowed, since there are no references to this in the Bible). Yours seems to be more of a literal reading of the text, and if you're going to stand by your literalist approach, you would also have to keep kosher, stone adulterers to death, offer sacrifices at the temple in Jerusalem, marry your sister-in-law if your brother passes away, annul all divorces if you stick to the NT, or allow them if you prefer the OT.

    The truth is we don't know exactly what G-d "thinks" about homosexuality. We grapple with different interpretations of the same texts and come up with various hypotheses. The biblical texts are not as clear as you believe them to be. Factors such as what translation you are using also play a key role in how you interpret the text. A christian translation is very different from a jewish one, and within these religions there are many conflicting views.

    I think we have to be humble enough to say:"I don't know for sure!"
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 06, 2012 2:51 PM GMT
    StephenOABC said
    calibro saidlook, you can put all the lipstick you want on this pig. the truth is the bible says being gay is a sin. you can twist it all you want, but it's pretty clear.


    Post-Biblical Christianity, then, Calibro.

    There was Christianity before the canonical Bible.
    There will be Christianity after the canonical Bible.

    Now that I'm wrapping up the second edition of The Greatest Bible Study in Historical Accuracy, I'm prepared to accept Christianity having foundations on books of [library of/Bible of] knowledge viewed in a better light (historical accuracy) and new books of knowledge. My current first edition is like a pencil sketch of the oil painting that follows.


    Deuteronomy 21:18-21

    King James Version (KJV)

    18If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:

    19Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;

    20And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.

    21And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

    # # #

    I think CBS will have a one-hour special on a case of "[family] honor killing."

    The astrological perspective would be although individuals are usually born to families their adult reason for being is not always to be family-oriented and clannish. If you have planets at your IC, you do hover around your family tree, if not, Heaven (for the astrological matrix of the solar system is Heaven to a certain extent) has ordained other lifestyles, life journeys, and life purposes.

    The book of Deuteronomy is "canonical" in Judaism and canonical in Christianity. My reformation of Christianity would not have those verses (post-canon Christianity). This would also require the removal of the verse where Jesus says not one letter of the law will be changed.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 06, 2012 3:56 PM GMT
    Of course homosexuality is a sin in the bible.

    But then again, prove to me it was GOD who wrote or even inspired the bible. Its just as likely that the Devil or some Satanic, evil force inspired the bible and the Koran. Doesn't make sense that humanity would exist for millions of years, and then God decides that we need some "bible" which will cause misunderstandings, and their inherent wars and hostilities. More likely to be the work of Satan.

    Gay is from God. Why else does your cock fit in an asshole, mouth or hand just so perfectly?
  • mybud

    Posts: 11819

    Apr 06, 2012 4:11 PM GMT
    calibro saidlook, you can put all the lipstick you want on this pig. the truth is the bible says being gay is a sin. you can twist it all you want, but it's pretty clear.
    Well Jesus didn't mentioned a word about Homosexuality being a sin...When it comes to spiritually...follow the God within yourself...screw the bible...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 07, 2012 12:27 AM GMT
    Ah, a "validate gays and Christianity" thread.

    this-will-not-end-well.jpg

    Always lulzy fun to result.
  • calibro

    Posts: 8888

    Apr 07, 2012 7:54 AM GMT
    StephenOABC said
    calibro saidlook, you can put all the lipstick you want on this pig. the truth is the bible says being gay is a sin. you can twist it all you want, but it's pretty clear.


    Post-Biblical Christianity, then, Calibro.

    There was Christianity before the canonical Bible.
    There will be Christianity after the canonical Bible.

    Now that I'm wrapping up the second edition of The Greatest Bible Study in Historical Accuracy, I'm prepared to accept Christianity having foundations on books of [library of/Bible of] knowledge viewed in a better light (historical accuracy) and new books of knowledge. My current first edition is like a pencil sketch of the oil painting that follows.


    there was no christianity before the old testament. and as someone who studied the original hebrew, there's quite little debate about it homosexuality being a sin. to me, judiaism, and transitively christianity, is nothing more than a fairytale. so i'm firm in my belief the bible does condemn homosexuality, but it doesn't really matter to me because there's no authority to it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 07, 2012 8:21 AM GMT
    calibro saidlook, you can put all the lipstick you want on this pig. the truth is the bible says being gay is a sin. you can twist it all you want, but it's pretty clear.


    Actually, it never did. Only in more modern translations have the archaic Greek and Hebrew words been translated into "homosexual." In one of those instances, an earlier translation had the word "masterbater."

    All instances of passages now referencing homosexuality CAN be refuted.
  • cookingitswee...

    Posts: 445

    Apr 07, 2012 8:54 AM GMT
    calibro saidlook, you can put all the lipstick you want on this pig. the truth is the bible says being gay is a sin. you can twist it all you want, but it's pretty clear.


    No, that's not true. For one the word homosexual was added in, and for another words like abomination are often read at the time as unclean (not a sin). It's these other interpretations of the text that allow the bible to be interpreted differently, as it once was.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 07, 2012 9:32 AM GMT
    Trollileo said
    thenes said
    calibro saidlook, you can put all the lipstick you want on this pig. the truth is the bible says being gay is a sin. you can twist it all you want, but it's pretty clear.


    Actually, it never did. Only in more modern translations have the archaic Greek and Hebrew words been translated into "homosexual." In one of those instances, an earlier translation had the word "masterbater."

    All instances of passages now referencing homosexuality CAN be refuted.
    Source? I need confirmation!


    Well, the bible for one. Also the book What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality. You can find it on Amazon. It goes through each and every passage that modern Christians think reference homosexuality and shows how that's not only not the case, but given the cultural understandings of the time how that's impossible.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 07, 2012 9:52 AM GMT
    Trollileo said
    thenes said
    Trollileo said
    thenes said
    calibro saidlook, you can put all the lipstick you want on this pig. the truth is the bible says being gay is a sin. you can twist it all you want, but it's pretty clear.


    Actually, it never did. Only in more modern translations have the archaic Greek and Hebrew words been translated into "homosexual." In one of those instances, an earlier translation had the word "masterbater."

    All instances of passages now referencing homosexuality CAN be refuted.
    Source? I need confirmation!


    Well, the bible for one. Also the book What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality. You can find it on Amazon. It goes through each and every passage that modern Christians think reference homosexuality and shows how that's not only not the case, but given the cultural understandings of the time how that's impossible.
    Awesome. Looking it up now. Thanks.


    I think the torach only mentions that it is an abomination for a man to lie with a man as he does with a woman...

    Nothing else

    So by my interpretation, anal sex with men is fine, just stick to the vaginas with the women... #elucidating_the_interpretation_problem
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 07, 2012 11:05 AM GMT
    ADAM AND EVE NOT ADAM AND STEVE!

    GOD HATES FAGS!!!!*


    *Acceptible, really, as they've been proven to cause cancer.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 07, 2012 11:17 AM GMT
    calibro saidlook, you can put all the lipstick you want on this pig. the truth is the bible says being gay is a sin. you can twist it all you want, but it's pretty clear.


    +1 i agree.

    If the bible is open for interpretation, then so is God. And right now, Iran interprets God to hate gays and kills 100 tenagers in his name for dressing emo like.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 07, 2012 11:42 AM GMT
    StephenOABC saidhttp://johnshore.com/2012/04/02/the-best-case-for-the-bible-not-condemning-homosexuality/



    Morality doesn't come from the Bible, so who gives a damn what it says? Justify who you are by being who you are with love and kindness for all. Religion is unhealthy for gays and all people.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 07, 2012 12:57 PM GMT
    calibro said
    StephenOABC said
    calibro saidlook, you can put all the lipstick you want on this pig. the truth is the bible says being gay is a sin. you can twist it all you want, but it's pretty clear.


    Post-Biblical Christianity, then, Calibro.

    There was Christianity before the canonical Bible.
    There will be Christianity after the canonical Bible.

    Now that I'm wrapping up the second edition of The Greatest Bible Study in Historical Accuracy, I'm prepared to accept Christianity having foundations on books of [library of/Bible of] knowledge viewed in a better light (historical accuracy) and new books of knowledge. My current first edition is like a pencil sketch of the oil painting that follows.


    I.
    there was no christianity before the old testament. and as someone who studied the original hebrew, there's quite little debate about it homosexuality being a sin. to me,

    II.
    judiaism, and transitively christianity, is nothing more than a fairytale. so i'm firm in my belief the bible does condemn homosexuality, but it doesn't really matter to me because there's no authority to it.


    The Book of Zechariah was written somewhere around 518 BCE.

    The Hebrew Bible (Tanak) was codified into the Jewish canon no earlier than 450 BCE. (The Written Torah is dated from 900 BCE to 450 BCE. I care to disagree with that because the Moses of the historian Manetho has Moses writing laws for the Egyptian slaves of the Exodus.)

    One cannot have a Jesus, Son of Man, heavily referencing the Book of Zecharia without Zechariah.

    "There was Christianity before the canonical Bible" was intended for to identify the Christianity before the canonizing of the New Testament. There was "Christianity 1.0" which would be Christianity during Jesus' lifetime. "Christianity 2.0" would be St. Paul's inventions. Christianity 2.0 makes homosexuality a sin.

    A quick ask dot com search "Homosexuality in the New Testament" shows

    In the New Testament (NT) there are three short passages that refer specifically to what today would be called homosexual activity. These passages appear in the Pauline epistles Romans 1:26–27, 1 Corinthians 6:9–10, and 1 Timothy 1:9–10. None of the four gospels mentions the subject from which it can be inferred that homosexuality was not a matter of major concern either for Jesus or for the early Christian movement.

    Calibro, do you think Pauline Christians of Christianity 2.0, Christians who think they are saved but not by Law, care about Leviticus 18:22? They can say, I am bi-gay and by the grace of God, I too will be saved ! Was my homosexuality ethical and sacred? Not only did I use secular humanism but did I also go into a place of worship and wait on the Lord to bless that aspect of my life so it would bring no harm to society? This is why it is important to have a blessing for homosexual relationships. Let there be something holy about it, not egos and the ego of the partnership running amok from under God's good will.

    In some ways Ancient Greek and Ancient Roman civilization have more authority than Ancient Hebrew civilization on what is a sin or not. Actions are sins to the extent that the sin is against humanity. Does a cultural phenomenon hurt the quality of a civilization? While Ancient Jerusalem was against homosexuality believing Jewish society/civilization would be harmed, Ancient Athens and Ancient Alexandria and Ancient Rome were fine with homosexuality-in-moderation (reference to Socrates' mindset).

    The Hebrew-Christian Bible has proven itself not to be the best guidebook book for producing great Ancient civilizations, great shoulders upon which future civilizations could stand.

    In response to your second statement (II). I think Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and the Church of JC of LDS are more than fairy tales. They are walls of confinement for living. Viewing these religions for all that they are worth (strong where strong, weak where weak) is freeing.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 07, 2012 1:01 PM GMT
    Thenes and Cooking,

    You guys are fundamentally wrong. What's going on in gay sex lifestyles today would not be in sync with or get the approval stamp from Hebrew communities contemporary with or referenced in the book of Leviticus.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 07, 2012 1:09 PM GMT
    botmrunner4toprunner said
    StephenOABC saidhttp://johnshore.com/2012/04/02/the-best-case-for-the-bible-not-condemning-homosexuality/



    Morality doesn't come from the Bible, so who gives a damn what it says? Justify who you are by being who you are with love and kindness for all. Religion is unhealthy for gays and all people.


    One of my favorite books is Buber's I and Thou. Beholding the sacred is higher than morality. ( I can develop and crystallize this inchoative thought when I have time. Basically, the Bible teaches us about the value of holding something sacred -- almost an appreciation of Zen. )
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 07, 2012 2:12 PM GMT
    mybud said
    calibro saidlook, you can put all the lipstick you want on this pig. the truth is the bible says being gay is a sin. you can twist it all you want, but it's pretty clear.
    Well Jesus didn't mentioned a word about Homosexuality being a sin...When it comes to spiritually...follow the God within yourself...screw the bible...


    I'm surprised at how readily you accept such a blatant lie, Calibro. Be more diligent and reach out to the truth.