Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
Still Waters

World’s first 'gay bible' published

215 posts in this topic

I wasn't quoting Leviticus! I was quoting Romans 1!

That's my answer to your posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

That's my answer to your posts.

Uh-huh. Your answer to my response of "Romans 1 is my clearest basis for my beliefs on homosexuality".... your answer is "you can't use Leviticus to condemn homosexuality".

Guess what - I agree with you! You can't use Leviticus to condemn homosexuality! What was your point in response then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I misunderstood your first post.......... I apologize.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul was called to be an Apostle of Jesus Christ (at least, this is what I believe). If what Paul says contradicts what Jesus said, then I agree that Jesus' words trump Paul. However, and despite occasional arguments to the contrary, I believe that Paul's teachings compliment Jesus' teachings rather than contradict. Taking into consideration that I believe Paul was chosen as one of Jesus' 12 apostles my conclusion therefore is that his writings are acceptable for teaching us what Jesus wants. Call it "faith", if you will. I wouldn't say that Paul's words are "greater" than Jesus', but his words are of a divine origin, just as Jesus' words are of divine origin (again, my view, based on faith).

i agree, as far as what he said about Jesus is concerned (or at least, if I don't necessarily agree with it, I agree that what he said about Jesus should be taken seriously); does that mean, though, that everything he ever wrote to anyone should be taken as canonical? Surely Jesus must have said a lot, even during his period of teaching, that wasn't strictly relevant to his teaching. Perhaps he was fortunate in that (so far as anyone knows) he never wrote anything down, so his collected correspondence couldn't be published, so that only the pertinent parts of his teaching could be selected by later collaters, rather than everything he ever wrote being sanctified. In other words, Paul said & wrote a lot that wasn't really relevant to what he thought about Jesus. Perhaps he could have done with a better editor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

* Another quote that comes to mind, seeing the selected Biblical quotations scattered about to prove whatever point people want them to: "The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose": W. Shakespeare, The Merchant Of Venice.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i agree, as far as what he said about Jesus is concerned (or at least, if I don't necessarily agree with it, I agree that what he said about Jesus should be taken seriously); does that mean, though, that everything he ever wrote to anyone should be taken as canonical? Surely Jesus must have said a lot, even during his period of teaching, that wasn't strictly relevant to his teaching. Perhaps he was fortunate in that (so far as anyone knows) he never wrote anything down, so his collected correspondence couldn't be published, so that only the pertinent parts of his teaching could be selected by later collaters, rather than everything he ever wrote being sanctified. In other words, Paul said & wrote a lot that wasn't really relevant to what he thought about Jesus. Perhaps he could have done with a better editor.

I see no reason not to think of Paul's writings as canonical scripture. Many early Christians certainly considered Paul's words to be scripture (2 Peter 3:16 comes to mind which refers to Paul's writings as such).
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see no reason not to think of Paul's writings as canonical scripture. Many early Christians certainly considered Paul's words to be scripture (2 Peter 3:16 comes to mind which refers to Paul's writings as such).

Oh, indeed; but all of them? Every single word he's ever recorded to have written? Not just the things he had to say about Jesus? (the comments in Corinithians were among some general admonishments to Christian the community on how they ought to behave, if I recall, and weren't just about homsexuality, and was nothing to do with his interpretation of what Jesus was about. And surely, in Romans, he's talking about the general state of immorality of mankind as a whole, going back to the Fall and so on, much like Augustine was to spend a lot of his time worrying about, and he'd almost certainly have included heterosexual sex outside marriage as well (and possibly within it as well, bearing in mind his opinion about women). And there's another thing; he didn't exactly see women as equals, did he?; should his view on that be given as much importance? If Homosexuality should be comdemned by Christianity because of what Paul said about it, shouldn't women be forbidden from entering a church and be the property of men and so on?

Edited by Lord Vetinari

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, indeed; but all of them? Every single word he's ever recorded to have written?

In my opinion, yes.

Not just the things he had to say about Jesus? (the comments in Corinithians were among some general admonishments to Christian the community on how they ought to behave, if I recall, and weren't just about homsexuality, and was nothing to do with his interpretation of what Jesus was about. And surely, in Romans, he's talking about the general state of immorality of mankind as a whole, going back to the Fall and so on, much like Augustine was to spend a lot of his time worrying about, and he'd almost certainly have included heterosexual sex outside marriage as well (and possibly within it as well, bearing in mind his opinion about women).

Paul did speak of the state of immorality, and made a long list of the ways humanity was disobeying God. That led to all kinds of immoral behaviour, not just homosexuality. Romans 1:24 could arguably refer to heterosexual sex outside the context of marriage.

And there's another thing; he didn't exactly see women as equals, did he?; should his view on that be given as much importance? If Homosexuality should be comdemned by Christianity because of what Paul said about it, shouldn't women be forbidden from entering a church and be the property of men and so on?

Women should not be forbidden from entering a church and they shouldn't be the property of men either. You've seriously misunderstood the writings of Paul if you think he hated women or thought of them as less than men.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not religious so everything I put is my OWN opinion. It may not always be suited to others views and it may not always be bang on (although thats rare, lol) but what I have noticed is the religious lot do not actually put anything of their own opinion, all they seem to do is quote the bible or koran.

Is it possible for them to maybe tell us how they feel without quoting chapters or verses? ........please?

Edited by freetoroam
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, yes.

I'm pretty sure that, the Gospel writers actually been eyewitnesses to events as they happened, or had his personal correspondence been collected, (if he'd been able to write), Jesus would have had a lot of things to say about a lot of things, that weren't necessarily relevant to the message that he wanted to get across. Would everything that he had ever discussed with his work colleagues have gone into the Gospels, or would they have just restricted themselves to matters pertinent to his mission? I think that's the problem with what happened to Paul; everything that he said has been taken as being of equal importance, whether or not it has anything to do with Jesus. And whatever carefully selected quotations people might be able to mine as possibly having something to do with sexual morality (such as were quoted above), Jesus seemed, on the whole, to not consider it as the most important issue that he had to address. The hypocrisy of religious leaders and those who were so ostentatious about following the Law to the letter, perhaps, he was rather more concerned about. Maybe that might have been something that Paul ought to have considered a bit more. Who can say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that's the problem with what happened to Paul; everything that he said has been taken as being of equal importance, whether or not it has anything to do with Jesus.

The message of the Bible is and always will be about mankind's relationship with God. Jesus came to preach salvation via his death and resurrection, and along the way tell a little about how to live for God. Paul continues that theme - expanding on the idea of righteousness and how one may live pleasing lives for God.

And whatever carefully selected quotations people might be able to mine as possibly having something to do with sexual morality (such as were quoted above), Jesus seemed, on the whole, to not consider it as the most important issue that he had to address.

Sexual immorality is just one issue among many. When it comes to the concept of "sin", there is no distinction between one sin and another to God. They all lead to the same place - death. Paul is not focused more on sexual immorality than other types of sins, they are just one in a list of many other things he writes about. Even Jesus addressed the ideas of sexual immorality, so it would be wrong to say that Jesus had more important things to talk about.

In some ways this type of debate is counter-productive to Christianity simply because discussing the sin of sexual immorality on its own gives the false impression that Christians are hung up on this type of sin as somehow "worse" than others. And sure, some Christians do get hung up on the idea of sex. But not all Christians do. And by posting in a thread about sexual immorality I may give the impression that I do somehow think of it as a greater sin than others that I don't post about simply because there's no thread dedicated to it. Correct?

~ PA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even Jesus addressed the ideas of sexual immorality, so it would be wrong to say that Jesus had more important things to talk about.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Maybe the sabbath meant more to him than sex?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The message of the Bible is and always will be about mankind's relationship with God. Jesus came to preach salvation via his death and resurrection, and along the way tell a little about how to live for God. Paul continues that theme - expanding on the idea of righteousness and how one may live pleasing lives for God.

Sexual immorality is just one issue among many. When it comes to the concept of "sin", there is no distinction between one sin and another to God. They all lead to the same place - death. Paul is not focused more on sexual immorality than other types of sins, they are just one in a list of many other things he writes about. Even Jesus addressed the ideas of sexual immorality, so it would be wrong to say that Jesus had more important things to talk about.

In some ways this type of debate is counter-productive to Christianity simply because discussing the sin of sexual immorality on its own gives the false impression that Christians are hung up on this type of sin as somehow "worse" than others. And sure, some Christians do get hung up on the idea of sex. But not all Christians do. And by posting in a thread about sexual immorality I may give the impression that I do somehow think of it as a greater sin than others that I don't post about simply because there's no thread dedicated to it. Correct?

~ PA

Well, I agree there. That's why I don't know why some people get so wrapped up in that one issue, since there are so many other kinds of immorality about which Jesus did have much to say that was pretty unequivocal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I agree there. That's why I don't know why some people get so wrapped up in that one issue, since there are so many other kinds of immorality about which Jesus did have much to say that was pretty unequivocal.

Because it is the easiest thing to get at and show your hate, more so if you are dumb as a post and use a bible to excuse your hate ...You sure as heck won't see haters protest and chant abuse at serial killers and mad rapists, it's easier to go after the harmless.. Kinna like a bully would pick on the weak kid at school ..

Jesus never directly spoke about homosexuality, or something a lot worse paedophilia..The only thing Jesus really spoke directly about was adultery / marriage It could be that he accepted and understood gays, as the bible does portray Jesus as one who was kind and accepting of others including sinners..

Edited by Beckys_Mom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I agree there. That's why I don't know why some people get so wrapped up in that one issue, since there are so many other kinds of immorality about which Jesus did have much to say that was pretty unequivocal.

I can't speak for others, but for myself I suspect it may be a false impression based on the fact that people start threads like this. If this thread was not started in the first place, I wouldn't have brought up sexual immorality at all. And if it wasn't for people trying to convince me that I was wrong, I wouldn't have continued to respond. I am not focused on this sin more than others, but due to the attention a thread like this gets compared to, say, the death penalty thread, the mistaken impression may be left that I somehow think of this as a greater issue simply because of time devoted to this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.