User Tag List

Informational! Informational!:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 18 of 24 FirstFirst ... 8141516171819202122 ... LastLast
Results 137 to 144 of 188

Thread: California supreme court overturns gay marriage ban

  1. #137
    "Oh, now he's a philosophizer" Baylorguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Helotes, Texas
    Posts
    933
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Worse consequences? Can you elaborate?
    Sure can... worse condequences as in possible diseases you can pick up... physical consequences of the body. Pretty simple, no?


    It is not cut and dry. Nothing is cut and dry. PLEASE don't say that, because if you REALLY are going to stick to that and say that it is so just because it's in the Bible, then you ABSOLUTELY HAVE to believe this is perfectly fine too, because it's in the Bible. By your own argument, you HAVE to believe this.
    You're right, not everything is cut and dry. When looking at the Bible you have to consider many things; the context, culture and what type of literary device is being used. The verses I provided span the old and new testament. There is no hidden meaning and it states it is an unatural act. You can interpret it how you like, but that is the meaning. PERIOD.


    However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)

    When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)
    I am running out of time this morning, but that Bible never endorses slavery... slavery was a fact of life in the Old Testament. It existed before Israel was a nation and existed afterwards. Just as God does not approve of murder yet it is a reality, so he does not approve of slavery, yet it was a reality. Let's take a look at what God did to give slave as close to equal rights (keeping in mind it was a reality) shall we?

    The Bible acknowledged the slaveís status as the property of the master (Ex. 21:23; Lev. 25:46),

    The Bible restricted the masterís power over the slave. Ex. 21:20).
    The slave was a member of the masterís household (Lev. 22:11)

    The slave was required to rest on the Sabbath (Exodus 20:10; Deut. 5:14)

    The slave was required and to participate in religious observances (Gen. 17:13; Exodus 12:44; Lev. 22:11).

    The Bible prohibited extradition of slaves and granted them asylum (Deut. 23:16-17).

    The servitude of a Hebrew debt-slave was limited to six years (Ex. 21:2; Deut. 15:12).

    When a slave was freed, he was to receive gifts that enabled him to survive


    You MUST believe I should be put to death for having sex with a man.
    This one is easy... different culture, different time. Stoning was used in the old testament as well... that does not mean I am to pick up something and stone you for sleeping with a prostitute (hypothetically of course). You are not reading things in their context.

    You MUST believe that keeping slaves is fine.
    See above examples... again, wrong context. Slavery was a reality and was in no way endorsed by God. In fact, God made laws to helps slaves.

    You MUST believe it's perfectly acceptable to sell your own daughter as a slave, and that polygamy is fine.
    If you are referring to King Solomon, it is clear he made many mistakes in his life. Look at the trouble King David had when having children with multiple wives. It is clear there were more complications in life with multiple wives than with one wife.

    You MUST believe it's OK to beat your slave, as long as you don't kill the slave.
    Again, see the verses I provided

    You MUST believe if a man is caught raping a woman, he gives her father some money, then has to marry her and can't divorce.
    I don't know this one off the top of my head, so it would be great if you could provide the verse... thanks.

    You MUST believe that if a man has an affair with a married women, they should both be stoned to death.
    Again, culture and time.

    And there you have it. It's in the Bible. It's cut and dry. And the list goes on.
    Don't put words in my mouth. I never said "The Bible is cut and dry." I did say the verses I provided were cut and dry. In fact, I emphasized that people take things out of context all the time.

    You don't personally agree with homosexuality. That's fine. Would you vote against same sex marriage?[/QUOTE]
    Good question. This is something I still struggle with. So in all honesty, I don't know what I would vote for. I see the merits from a government standpoint, but I also see it as possibly endorsing something I do not believe in the first place.

  2. #138
    Doing it wrong until I do it right. xvart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Zone 8
    Posts
    5,594
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I haven't read all the posts since last night because I'm sitting in an airport on my phone; but, I do have to say this quickly: the context of the book of leviticus is entirely and totally "whack." Seriously, using leviticus in any debate is about as pointless and useless as using a calculator as a spellcheck. I think I saw Clint post some other "famous" versus from leviticus so I'm sure I won't have to whenever I get a wireless signal in my hotel.

    xvart.

    Quote Originally Posted by Baylorguy View Post
    Sure can... worse condequences as in possible diseases you can pick up... physical consequences of the body. Pretty simple, no?
    The same is true of heterosexual couples. The same is true of any couple that irresponsibly engages in sex.

    And, how is the context different in your examples but not in your "examples" that condemn homosexuality? Because you say so? Or, because we don't have slaves anymore so that isn't relevant? Everything is out of context when the world changes. Was it in context up until Abe Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclaimation? The everyone said, "welp, those bible versuses aren't in context anymore."

    xvar.
    Last edited by xvart; 05-21-2008 at 06:58 AM. Reason: merged posts.
    "The tragedy of life is not that every man loses; but that he almost wins."

    "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

  3. #139
    "Oh, now he's a philosophizer" Baylorguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Helotes, Texas
    Posts
    933
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Let me play!

    You also have to believe that if a city worships another god, you have to kill everyone in it.
    Or that everyone that works on the sabbath should be put to death.
    Jesus made it clear that there was a misunderstanding of the law... the Pharisees were so caught up in tradition and themselves that they totally missed the point of any kind of law:

    Mark 3
    1Another time he went into the synagogue, and a man with a shriveled hand was there. 2Some of them were looking for a reason to accuse Jesus, so they watched him closely to see if he would heal him on the Sabbath. 3Jesus said to the man with the shriveled hand, "Stand up in front of everyone."

    4Then Jesus asked them, "Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill?" But they remained silent.

    5He looked around at them in anger and, deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts, said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." He stretched it out, and his hand was completely restored. 6Then the Pharisees went out and began to plot with the Herodians how they might kill Jesus.

  4. #140
    "Oh, now he's a philosophizer" Baylorguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Helotes, Texas
    Posts
    933
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The same is true of heterosexual couples. The same is true of any couple that irresponsibly engages in sex.
    I agree; however, I was simply saying greater consequences as far as coveting vs homosexuality or lying vs homosexuality. But yes, ANY type of sin can have bad consequences. That is the very reason why sin is detestable to God. I do not want to be lumped in with those that feel homosexuality is a greater sin... IT IS NOT. Sin is sin, either way you look at it.



    And, how is the context different in your examples but not in your "examples" that condemn homosexuality? Because you say so? Or, because we don't have slaves anymore so that isn't relevant? Everything is out of context when the world changes. Was it in context up until Abe Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclaimation? The everyone said, "welp, those bible versuses aren't in context anymore."
    The difference between our verses is that no where in the Bible does it endorse Homosexuality... all verses that pertain to it clearly condemn it; furthermore, I also provided a verse from Romans, so you can scrap Leviticus if you want. There are certain core truths in the Bible that do not change, even with culture.

    If everything in the Bible changes with culture, what good is it? You are touching on relativism; I believe in absolutes, and the Bible is my absolute reference point on what is good and bad. It does not cover everything under the sun, but it definitely gives us solid ground on making decisions. Shall we go with Hitler's philosophy (or better yet, Friedrich Nietzsche's philosophy) or maybe Joseph Stalin? I use the Bible as a moral absolute and do not believe that anything goes. What Hitler and Stalin did were totally justified by their philosophies... there are no absolutes, so it is ok to round up millions of people and kill them.

  5. #141
    wmgorum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Little Rock, AR
    Posts
    230
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think it's interesting how many Christians use the Mosaic Law to justify many views when Jesus said he came to fulfill the law. I also think it's interesting how they pick and choose what they want to from the Bible then castigate others for doing the same thing.

    If we're going to look at the Mosaic Law, remember that it's an abomination to wear clothings of mixed fiber. No poly/cotton blends for you, my dears. It's also unclean to eat animals with cloven hooves. Yum! This bacon cheeseburger sure is good!

    I also think it's interesting how even though the New Testament CLEARLY states that Christians are no longer held to follow the Mosaic Law, Christians still follow very specific parts of it, typically those who are used to oppress others.

    I think it's very interesting how Christians are opposed to the supposed "gay agenda" and accuse homosexuals of attempting to "convert" everyone to the way we live when Christians are dictated to proselityze all the world. I also think it's conveniently overlooked by many Christians who accuse gays of attemping to "convert" everyone to the way we live when as gays, many of us say we had no choice in the matter. If we believe we had no choice in the matter, why do you think we would believe that you have a choice in the matter? I find the whole "lifestyle choice" to be a laughable argument in the first place. Yes, I woke up one morning and decided that I'd like nothing better than to oppose everything I'd ever been taught, to be equated with molesters and practicers of bestiality, and to be scorned by society at large.

    There have undoubtedly been countless atrocities committed in the name of God and of the Church. The Church has attempted to oppress people for centuries. Coming from a Deaf family, it's common knowledge that in years past, the official position of the Church was that people who were Deaf were uneducable and couldn't be saved (according to the Church's interpretation of scripture) because they could not "hear" the Word of God. I have a hard time believing that people like my grandparents, great grandparents, cousins, etc., are condemned. The Church has obviously been wrong before in their interpretation of the Bible and it seems obvious to me that the Church will be wrong again. The Church and its leaders are not infallible.

  6. #142
    Cardiac Nurse JB_OrchidGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    3,818
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Baylorguy View Post
    This is what is absolutely shocking to me. You readily admit to never reading the Bible, yet you are using it to argue against a Christian perspective and a person who seems to me to know the Bible quite well. You are doing what so many people do... you use the bible when it is convenient and when it fits in with your agenda. People will discredit it in one breath and then pick and choose verses in another. If you are going to read the Bible to refute a Christian perspective, why even bother? You have a biased view and you will learn nothing. You cannot simply pick up the Bible, read it once, and grasp the full meaning of its content.
    The bible thumpers do the same thing. They take parts of the bible and use it to support their idea and then discard the rest. You make comments like that is not relevant any more or we take it out of context or something. I know a little about the bible because I speak to folks who are studying the bible at work. I have seen other arguments with the bible for or against something. I have not read it because I have not had the time. I do know it contradicts itself and from what I read it was put together from several different peoples books and they conveniently left out the books that threatened to contradict the power of the church.

    I agree with Will. The Church is not infallible. If murder is murder then why did the church have the crusades to convert the pagans? Then they took many of the pagan holidays and symbols as their own.
    JB
    Friend me on facebook with JB_orchidguy@yahoo.com.
    Growlist Updated 05/08/13

  7. #143
    Outsiders71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,005
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by wmgorum View Post
    I think it's interesting how many Christians use the Mosaic Law to justify many views when Jesus said he came to fulfill the law. I also think it's interesting how they pick and choose what they want to from the Bible then castigate others for doing the same thing.
    Matthew 5:17-20:

    17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

    Quote Originally Posted by wmgorum View Post
    If we're going to look at the Mosaic Law, remember that it's an abomination to wear clothings of mixed fiber. No poly/cotton blends for you, my dears. It's also unclean to eat animals with cloven hooves. Yum! This bacon cheeseburger sure is good!
    Do you know why people weren't allowed back then to wear clothing of mixed fibers? This is an example of a cultural/background information that people like yourself don't know and therefore completely butcher the reasoning. The reasoning was pagans wore these clothings and the Israelites were not to look like pagans.

    Quote Originally Posted by wmgorum View Post
    I also think it's interesting how even though the New Testament CLEARLY states that Christians are no longer held to follow the Mosaic Law, Christians still follow very specific parts of it, typically those who are used to oppress others.
    Another mistake. We are no longer condemned by the law thanks to Christ but we are still to obey it as humanly possible:

    Romans 6:1-23:
    1 What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2 By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3 Or don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life. 5 If we have been united with him like this in his death, we will certainly also be united with him in his resurrection. 6 For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin-- 7 because anyone who has died has been freed from sin. 8 Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. 9 For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over him. 10 The death he died, he died to sin once for all; but the life he lives, he lives to God. 11 In the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus. 12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its evil desires. 13 Do not offer the parts of your body to sin, as instruments of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God, as those who have been brought from death to life; and offer the parts of your body to him as instruments of righteousness. 14 For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace. 15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means! 16 Don't you know that when you offer yourselves to someone to obey him as slaves, you are slaves to the one whom you obey--whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you wholeheartedly obeyed the form of teaching to which you were entrusted. 18 You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness. 19 I put this in human terms because you are weak in your natural selves. Just as you used to offer the parts of your body in slavery to impurity and to ever-increasing wickedness, so now offer them in slavery to righteousness leading to holiness. 20 When you were slaves to sin, you were free from the control of righteousness. 21 What benefit did you reap at that time from the things you are now ashamed of? Those things result in death! 22 But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves to God, the benefit you reap leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life. 23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

    Quote Originally Posted by wmgorum View Post
    I think it's very interesting how Christians are opposed to the supposed "gay agenda" and accuse homosexuals of attempting to "convert" everyone to the way we live when Christians are dictated to proselityze all the world. I also think it's conveniently overlooked by many Christians who accuse gays of attemping to "convert" everyone to the way we live when as gays, many of us say we had no choice in the matter. If we believe we had no choice in the matter, why do you think we would believe that you have a choice in the matter? I find the whole "lifestyle choice" to be a laughable argument in the first place. Yes, I woke up one morning and decided that I'd like nothing better than to oppose everything I'd ever been taught, to be equated with molesters and practicers of bestiality, and to be scorned by society at large.
    Regardless how you woke up, you didn't expect Christians or Jews to care about the redefining of the institution of marriage? Once again I have yet to see anyone prove that the term marriage needs redefining and that civil union or whatever term gays want to use will not be sufficient. It's not about rights.
    James 1:17

    "Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows."

  8. #144
    Outsiders71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,005
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by JB_OrchidGuy View Post
    The bible thumpers do the same thing. They take parts of the bible and use it to support their idea and then discard the rest.
    Please do show where me or Baylorguy have taken parts of the Bible to support our ideas and discard the rest. Nothing he's posted or that I've posted counters the Bible as a whole.

    Quote Originally Posted by JB_OrchidGuy View Post
    You make comments like that is not relevant any more or we take it out of context or something. I know a little about the bible because I speak to folks who are studying the bible at work. I have seen other arguments with the bible for or against something. I have not read it because I have not had the time. I do know it contradicts itself and from what I read it was put together from several different peoples books and they conveniently left out the books that threatened to contradict the power of the church.
    So you assume that it contradicts itself because it was written by several authors, yet you haven't read it for yourself to find these contradictions? Lastly you must have ignored my reply to you, earlier in this thread. You are totally oblivious to what the gnostic gospels were and why they are not part of the Bible.

    Quote Originally Posted by JB_OrchidGuy View Post
    I agree with Will. The Church is not infallible. If murder is murder then why did the church have the crusades to convert the pagans? Then they took many of the pagan holidays and symbols as their own.
    So the actions of a few men are enough to negate God and the Bible. I think not my friend. Also the crusades were not about converting pagans, it was about reacquiring the holy land.
    James 1:17

    "Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •