NationStates Jolt Archive

Let's try this again people...

Don't bother asking "why?" because there is no answer.

Let's try this again people...

Don't bother asking "why?" because there is no answer.
Why?

Why?
there is no matrix

there is no matrix
Damn, I want my pills back then.

Damn, I want my pills back then.
no way, they're blue and red...my favorite colors!

Argue the effect of the Beatles on rock n roll using only the Treaty of Portsmouth.

Are we gona' talk about Spuds MacKenzie or am I just wasting my time?

Well, that was a nice idea that turned out wrong. :D

Besides, it's been done before.

There are only a dozen places in the Bible that admonish homosexual activity.
There are literally hundreds of passages admonishing heterosexual activity. :)

What was it that sig said? "That doesn't mean god hates heterosexuals. It just means they need more managing." Something to that effect.

It is impossible to argue pro-homosexual using the Bible because the Bible specifically speaks against homosexuality. In Romans, Chapter 1, Verse 27 it says, when talking about who will not inherit the Kingdom of God,:
"and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error."
(from the King James version)

If you don't believe me, whip out your own Bibles and read that passage and the ones leading up to it. I left the book, chapter and verse number, I hope you're all at least competent enough to finding it.

That only talks about gay *men*, not about women. What about lesbians hmm?

Haha, good point.

That only talks about gay *men*, not about women. What about lesbians hmm?
nice one

That only talks about gay *men*, not about women. What about lesbians hmm?


It goes for women too. The Bible was written in a male dominated era, so the exclusion of women in specific is not suprising, but it simply refers to any homosexual act as unclean in God's eyes.

It is impossible to argue pro-homosexual using the Bible because the Bible specifically speaks against homosexuality. In Romans, Chapter 1, Verse 27 it says, when talking about who will not inherit the Kingdom of God,:
"and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error."
(from the King James version)

If you don't believe me, whip out your own Bibles and read that passage and the ones leading up to it. I left the book, chapter and verse number, I hope you're all at least competent enough to finding it.


that's just that big closet case paul shooting his mouth off, jesus was gay.
lived with his mother until he was 30. hung out witrh 12 guys and an exprostitute(can you say fag hag. "oh jesus doesn't treat me like the other guys, he doesn't just want me for my body. he's so sensitive"). he called peter "the rock", that's pretty much the same as calling your best boy stud muffin, or mr. stiffy.

that's just that big closet case paul shooting his mouth off, jesus was gay.
lived with his mother until he was 30. hung out witrh 12 guys and an exprostitute(can you say fag hag. "oh jesus doesn't treat me like the other guys, he doesn't just want me for my body. he's so sensitive"). he called peter "the rock", that's pretty much the same as calling your best boy stud muffin, or mr. stiffy.

Hahahaha!

Theres a song called Jesus Christ Homosexual by a band called Corporate Avenger...I have the sudden urge to listen to it.

that's just that big closet case paul shooting his mouth off, jesus was gay.
lived with his mother until he was 30. hung out witrh 12 guys and an exprostitute(can you say fag hag. "oh jesus doesn't treat me like the other guys, he doesn't just want me for my body. he's so sensitive"). he called peter "the rock", that's pretty much the same as calling your best boy stud muffin, or mr. stiffy.


Jesus wasn't gay. He got married to Mary Magdaline and had a kid. Ever read "The Da Vinci Code?" The book itself was made up, but the story behind it of Jesus' son being the Holy Grail was true. The only reason we're starting to hear of these things now is because the Illumitati are slacking off in keeping this quiet. They have been for 200 years but the flow of digital information an the mass media is getting to be too much for them to handle without announcing themselves to the public.

It goes for women too. The Bible was written in a male dominated era, so the exclusion of women in specific is not suprising, but it simply refers to any homosexual act as unclean in God's eyes.

It's the f**ing Word of God. So no mention of female homosexuality = fine and dandy in God's eyes.

It's the f**ing Word of God. So no mention of female homosexuality = fine and dandy in God's eyes.


Well, I see your point. God is a guy, so I imagine He, like any straight guy, would get off to two(or more) hot chicks goin' at it. :D

Jesus wasn't gay. He got married to Mary Magdaline and had a kid. Ever read "The Da Vinci Code?" The book itself was made up, but the story behind it of Jesus' son being the Holy Grail was true. The only reason we're starting to hear of these things now is because the Illumitati are slacking off in keeping this quiet. They have been for 200 years but the flow of digital information an the mass media is getting to be too much for them to handle without announcing themselves to the public.
man, having a kid doesn't mean you're not gay. i've known tons of gay men and lesbians, who got married and had children in some vain attempt to go straight, but they still have same sex relations on the side until the contradictions get to much and they come out.

The bible says it's immoral for man to spill his seed onto the earth. This is rarely applied to women. To my knowledge, few Christians (even the ones who believe masturbation is a sin) are against a woman going through her period. I figure I don't have to go through the birds and bees for people to understand how that would classify as spilling of seed.

The bible says it's immoral for man to spill his seed onto the earth. This is rarely applied to women. To my knowledge, few Christians (even the ones who believe masturbation is a sin) are against a woman going through her period. I figure I don't have to go through the birds and bees for people to understand how that would classify as spilling of seed.


About spilling the seed onto the earth...

thats why you use a tissue :p

I'll never understand how people can call a normal function of a woman's body a sin. And just like menstration is a normal funtion for women, masterbation is a normal function for men. :D

sourced from Interfaith Working Group:-

Clearly we regard certain rules, especially in the Old Testament, as no longer binding. Other things we regard as binding, including legislation in the Old Testament that is not mentioned at all in the New. What is our principle of selection here?
For example; virtually all modern readers would agree with the Bible in rejecting:

incest
rape
adultery
intercourse with animals

But we disagree with the Bible on most other sexual mores. The Bible condemned the following behaviors which we generally allow:
intercourse during menstruation
celibacy
exogamy (marriage with non-Jews)
naming sexual organs
nudity (under certain conditions)
masturbation (some Christians still condemn this)
birth control (some Christians still forbid this)

And the bible regarded semen and menstrual blood as unclean, which most of us do not
Likewise, the bible permitted behaviors that we today condemn:
prostitution
polygamy
levirate marriage
sex with slaves
concubinage
treatment of women as property
very early marriage (for the girl, age 11-13)

And while the Old Testament accepted divorce, Jesus forbade it. In short, of the sexual mores mentioned here, we only agree with the Bible on four of them, and disagree with it on sixteen!

So why do we appeal to proof texts in Scripture in the case of homosexuality alone, when we feel perfectly free to disagree with Scripture regarding most other sexual practices? Obviously many of our choices in these matters are arbitrary. Mormon polygamy was outlawed in this country, despite the constitutional protection of freedom of religion, because it violated the sensibilities of the dominant Christian culture, even though no explicit biblical prohibition against polygamy exists.

If we insist on placing ourselves under the old law, as Paul reminds us, we are obligated to keep every commandment of the law (Gal. 5:3). But if Christ is the end of the law (Rom. 10:4), if we have been discharged from the law to serve, not under the old written code but in the new life of the Spirit (Rom. 7:6), then all of these Old Testament sexual mores come under the authority of the Spirit. We cannot then take even what Paul says as a new law. Christians reserve the right to pick and choose which laws they will observe, though they seldom admit to doing just that. And this is as true of evangelicals and fundamentalists as it is of liberals and mainliners.

Besides, the bible looks down upon sex, and sexual thoughts, in any context, be it hetro- or homo-sexual, outside of marriage. It, however, doesn't look down on the loving relationship that can develope. And love and sex aren't mutually inclusive, you can have a loving relationship with no sex :O

Besides, the bible looks down upon sex, and sexual thoughts, in any context, be it hetro- or homo-sexual, outside of marriage. It, however, doesn't look down on the loving relationship that can develope. And love and sex aren't mutually inclusive, you can have a loving relationship with no sex :O

Have fun with that. :)

Argue PRO-Homosexual using ONLY the Bible as your proof!

That's easy coz the bible is ghey! :D

You should define the following:

which bible? *I have read several, and surprise, not all of them were christian. Indeed not all of them were even Judeao/Christian/Islamic.*

Bible Just means "book" after all.

"Holy bible" Does narrow the fieled down from the almost infinite, to the infinite however.

Jim

Let's try this again people...

Don't bother asking "why?" because there is no answer.

How about Mark 7:15: 'There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him?'

How about Mark 7:15: 'There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him?'


That just forbids anal sex. And doctors colon checks.

A higher percentage of straight guys bum girls than gay guys bum guys.

That just forbids anal sex. And doctors colon checks.

A higher percentage of straight guys bum girls than gay guys bum guys.

No, it doesn't forbid anything. Read it again.

How about Mark 7:15: 'There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him?'

This accually means "Nothing outside the individual, can defile the individual"

PC I know.

Almost Zen, If you think about it. :)

Jim

This accually means "Nothing outside the individual, can defile the individual"

PC I know.

Almost Zen, If you think about it. :)

Jim

Ya, but with a literal interpretion of 'enter...'

No, it doesn't forbid anything. Read it again.

Right.

Someone needs to re-write the bible in proper english. It's been translated and changed so many times that one more time wouldn't hurt.

How do we know that the Bible is true, never mind right? Can anyone argue a pro-Bible view using only proven scientific theories about God? I doubt it.

From what I remember of Sunday School when I wasn't sticking crayons up my nose, there's a bit in the bible which says "love thy fellow man". If that isn't an invitation for bum banditry I don't know what is.

And there's a bit about if your gay lover is slapping his balls against your left cheek, you should turn your other cheek so he can slap 'em against the right too.

And there's the bit about converting your neighbour's arse in the ten commandments.

the christian bible, while it may contain many historical
referances (of somewhat questionable accuracy for the most
part), is primarily a work of mythology, printed with
human manufactured ink on human manufactured paper.

as such it can NEITHER PROVE NOR DISPROVE anything!

=^^=
.../\...

"The Bible contains six admonishments to homosexuals and 362 admonishments to heterosexuals. That doesn't mean that God doesn't love heterosexuals. It's just that they need more supervision." - Lynn Lavner.

<- I think that was the quote some-one wanted.

Also, for too long I've heard uber-right wing Christians declare things because THEY say GOD says so. There-fore, using their reasoning :

I say HOMOSEXUALITY IS GOOD, BECAUSE I SAY GOD SAYS IT IS SO.

( Ignoring for a full 30 seconds that your extremist idiots and I am atheist )

So there, how the hell do you lot like having to put up with it.

:rolleyes: + ;)

John 15:12- My command is this, love one another as I have loved you.

Surely this means we should treat everyone with respect? As some clever archbishop said, "God didn't create homosexuals so people would have someone to hate".

Of course not. He created them so we could have nicer curtains.

John 15:12- My command is this, love one another as I have loved you.

Surely this means we should treat everyone with respect? As some clever archbishop said, "God didn't create homosexuals so people would have someone to hate".

Of course not. He created them so we could have nicer curtains.

And thats what really riles me up about the " 1950's morals white picket fence oh we can't have that around here its just not on America " ... the curtains they spend their time being scandalised behind were probably designed by the people they abhor.

Ha. I love it.

:D

It goes for women too. The Bible was written in a male dominated era, so the exclusion of women in specific is not suprising, but it simply refers to any homosexual act as unclean in God's eyes.

Kinda contradicting yourself. Trying to justify that women are excluded from it by refering to the society at the time. At that time homosexuality was unaccepted, but are accepted now. You say at that time women where not worth mentioning, but are now.

We, the western society as a whole(that is based on christianity from the begining), have come to accept the fact that some things in the bible is clearly out of date. Such as slavery and seeing women as a lower human beeing. Therefor, I ask, is there any real point with this thread?

Jesus wasn't gay. He got married to Mary Magdaline and had a kid. Ever read "The Da Vinci Code?" The book itself was made up, but the story behind it of Jesus' son being the Holy Grail was true. The only reason we're starting to hear of these things now is because the Illumitati are slacking off in keeping this quiet. They have been for 200 years but the flow of digital information an the mass media is getting to be too much for them to handle without announcing themselves to the public.

Don't take that book for so granted. I have read it. And the guy doesn't say where he gotten his facts from so you can check up on them. It might be true, it might have some thruth in it. But believing in something that's a popular NOVELL is not what I call very enlighted.

Don't take that book for so granted. I have read it. And the guy doesn't say where he gotten his facts from so you can check up on them. It might be true, it might have some thruth in it. But believing in something that's a popular NOVELL is not what I call very enlighted.
well said lala

Also it was the priory of sion in the book... the illumnati was in the prequil to the DaVinci code.

honestly.. get yer facts right.

It goes for women too. The Bible was written in a male dominated era, so the exclusion of women in specific is not suprising, but it simply refers to any homosexual act as unclean in God's eyes.

Wow, I don't remember women being excluded from the bible? You mean all those prohibitions and laws about dealing with mensturation were talking about MEN who were on the rag?

It's the f**ing Word of God. So no mention of female homosexuality = fine and dandy in God's eyes.

Can you blame him? Two chicks getting it on is hot.

No Longer Silent Phoenix Declaration

As Christian clergy we believe it is time to share our perspective concerning Gay, Lesbian, Bi-sexual and Transgendered (GLBT) persons. We celebrate the end of the debate. The verdict is in. Homosexuality is not a sickness, not a choice, and not a sin. We affirm that GLBT persons are distinctive, holy, and precious gifts to all who struggle to become the family of God.

We stand in solidarity as those who are committed to work and pray for full acceptance and inclusion of GLBT persons in our churches and in our world. GLBT persons are condemned and excluded by individuals and institutions, political and religious, who claim to be speaking the truth of Christian teaching. This leads directly and indirectly to intolerance, discrimination, suffering, and even death. Political and religious rhetoric has monopolized the public perception of the stance of Christian persons on this issue. This stance continues to cripple the spirit of innocent people. The Christian faith compels us to be part of the healing for the souls wounded by this tragic, violent, and destructive hatred. <snip>

full text at

www.nolongersilent.org

Not sure why I am jumping into this, but I always defend minorities.....
Read this http://www.geocities.com/ambwww/BIBLE-TOP-10.htm

If you TRULY want a GOOD drawn out explanation of why homosexuality is NOT condemned by the Bible look at: http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibl.htm



But here is a generla overview.

Leviticus
For starters, Leviticus has possibly one of the most cited references to homosexuality,but no one refers to the verses that deal with one nation being able to take slaves from another nation, the verse concerning not eating shellfish, and the verse concerning not wearing clothing woven of two cloths. When shellfish is referred to as an abomination as well.
PLUS it is a Old Testament book, which most Christians say they no longer follow, and only the New Testament applies after Jesus Christ, right?

Romans
Paul was referring, obviously, by the words used to temple prostituion which was a form of idolatory. This has been stated several times, the actual Greek words used in the original verse were referring to men who do such.

Sodom and Gomorrah: Their sin was inhospitality, and greed which is made clear in the Bible. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that Sodom and Gomorrah were actually destroyed because it was full of gays or lesbians. The main theme of the story was that Sodom and Gomorrah were greedy, etc.

Jesus Christ NEVER spoke of homosexuality, or condemned homosexuals.


Quoted From a Website

Romans 1:26 and 27 has St. Paul criticizing sexual activity which is against a person's nature or disposition. This passage has been variously interpreted to refer to all homosexual behavior, to orgiastic activity, to temple prostitution, or to heterosexuals who were engaging in same-sex exchanges. The meaning is unclear.
I Corinthians 6:9 contains a lists of activities that will prevent people from inheriting the Kingdom of God. One was translated as referring to masturbation, and is now sometimes translated as "homosexual". The true meaning is lost.
1 Tim 1:9 is similar to I Corinthians.
Jude 7 refers to the people of Sodom as "giving themselves over to fornication and going after strange flesh". The latter has been variously translated as women engaging in sexual intercourse with angels and as homosexuality. The exact meaning is lost.


MANY who profess to be Christians commit many other sins in the Bible mentioned MUCH more than homosexuality, and condemned MUCH worse than homosexuality. How about Thou Shalt Not Tell a Lie? Why are people specifically targeting homosexuality? Perhaps it is more that it is just "different"? Why not target the many physical, mental, and verbal abuses that go on every day in households across the country?

Why not put all this talk, and energy against gay marriage into talking about why the divorce rate among straight couples is so high?

Why criticize gays so much when there is a high rate of violence, and abuse in our schools? In our homes?

So think, are you condemning homosexuality because of your culture/society's outlook on it, or truly because of your religion?

How about Mark 7:15: 'There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him?'

Which is saying that no man is defiled by anything entering into him, i.e. eating pork or receiving hot love from a man won't keep you out of heaven.

One stream of logic I once used to prove homosexuality was not only allowed but supported by the Bible was:

1. God is love
2. God is male
3. God is complete and it is a sin to add others
4. We are made in God's image
Conclusion: Therefore homosexuality is not only allowed, but heterosexuality is a sin, since it infers that God is incomplete by saying we, his images, are incomplete without something different to make us whole.

Now, the second statement can be disputed as a grammatical quirk, and by referring to verses saying God has a mother's love. The grammatical argument is cheap and proves nothing. The second falls because it does not say that God is female, only that he has a feminine quality- he also brought us all into the world, which is also a feminine quality.

In any case, only statement 1 and 2, or 3 and 4 are needed to reach the conclusion.

Right.

Someone needs to re-write the bible in proper english. It's been translated and changed so many times that one more time wouldn't hurt.

That may not be a good thing ... Just imagine ...

Jesus turning up for the last supper :

" Yoy, yo, yo, my niggers, how-zit hanging my bro's ? " ...

A short while later :

" Shit man ! Its the fuzz ! Split ! "

* Sound of nail gun going off.

;)

Though even though I am tending towards being gay, so to speak, I must say I am glad, very glad, god made woman/eve a-la bible, as what the hell would we have done with a third half a rib cage ... if my hazy biblical memory is correct ... ( Its not my fault there are no pictures ) ...

Lol. Did you know that the Bible has been translated into txtspEk so that you can text your vicar about a problem and he'll just whack out the right verse. There was also a bloke a while ago who translated the bible into Cockney rhyming slang. Then again, both of those methods leave the original meaning of text they're based on intact.

the pig latin (http://www.museumofconceptualart.com/ible-bay.html) version is being worked on too

I wonder if anyone's translated it into Polari(gay slang)? That would hilarious.

EDIT: Found, by beautiful Google: http://www.thesisters.demon.co.uk/bible/