I Would Like to Thank Some of the Christians Here (Jesus, homosexuals)

[zenzero]

Friend mball,
There is nothing right or wrong and so would state that your wish of thanking only christians is limiting yourself.
Humans are one kind of being out of the many here on earth and some happen to follow the christian path while others follow another; which is all due to the time and space they are born in.
Homsexuality is an individual matter and none should have any say in it. Society makes laws and changes them as they go along. All this is natural.
So, if one should thank anyone; it is existence of whom we are all part of, for anything.
Love & rgds

[mball1297]

Originally Posted by rocka21

On that note. All these preachers need to chill when it comes to yelling about Homo's. They don't yell about divorce, over eating, and a ton of other sins, but some preachers it seems like " got it out" for gays.

If pressed on the issue, I will say I believe that the over all theme of the scriptures discourages sodomy and homosexuality. IMO

Then we agree. That's all I'm saying. There are so many other things wrong with just the institution of marriage, why worry so much about homosexuals? You are more than welcome to interpret the scriptures as discouraging homosexuality. I just don't think it should make you treat others badly, or differently. If you would not go off on people who have divorced and remarried, then why go off on homosexuals?

Anyway, I like what you say here, even though I disagree with the last part. But I do like how you word even that at least, it's not threatening or pushy.

[Green Gaia]

Originally Posted by rheff78

Well, once again. Being gay is not considered a sin, practicing being gay is.

Well that's your opinion and while I don't agree with you and think you're wrong, you're entitled to your opinion. I don't agree that "practicing being gay" is a sin therefore, I will **** my partner as much as she'll let me and not feel bad about it in the least. No matter how many times you and other holier-than-thou religious types try to make me feel ashamed by calling it a sin how I express my love to the person I love. OK?

[Muffled]

Originally Posted by rocka21

9-10ths got it right. I was wrong. Althou I still believe unmarried sex is wrong, can't prove with scripture, but the spirit agrees. ( so its just a personal thing).



True. Again, I think he covered it with the Adulterious generation talk. ( IMO)



No I can not, but why would he make a WEAPON, if he was this " peace and love" guy you are trying to portary? At the very least , he made a weapon and " drove" them out. You can interpit " drove" however you want. I think he was swinging that thing ( or why would he even make it?)

The Bible clearly indicates that sex between one male and one female who are married is what God intended. All else is sin. Even marriage is limited to those who are not family members (incest). So the whole idea of legitimizing sexual perversion by marriage is bogus. Marriage does not legitimize sin.

As for Jesus not saying anything about homosexuality, the law stands since Jesus claims to be the fulfillment of the law and he did not abnegate it by redefining it.

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Originally Posted by rocka21

Two queers in studio 54" doing it " does not "fit" the over all theme of the scriptures to me as not being a sin. If its ok with you , so be it.

Studio 54 was a bit before my time, but from what I know of it, there was much more "doing it" by straight people there than gay and lesbian people. If the actions of heterosexuals there don't have any bearing on the sinfulness of heterosexuality, why would the actions of homosexuals there have any bearing on the sinfulness of homosexuality?

Originally Posted by rocka21

On that note. All these preachers need to chill when it comes to yelling about Homo's. They don't yell about divorce, over eating, and a ton of other sins, but some preachers it seems like " got it out" for gays.

I agree. Regardless of how great a "threat" to "traditional marriage" they think that same-sex marriage might be (for whatever reasons they have that I can't begin to understand), they must recognize that the biggest actual threats to marriage are things like bankruptcy and adultery.

I think that any preacher, priest or minister who made himself or herself out to be a "defender of marriage" to condemn same-sex marriage and didn't speak out on the sub-prime mortgage issue has acted hypocritically.

Originally Posted by Muffled

The Bible clearly indicates that sex between one male and one female who are married is what God intended. All else is sin. Even marriage is limited to those who are not family members (incest). So the whole idea of legitimizing sexual perversion by marriage is bogus. Marriage does not legitimize sin.

The Bible clearly indicates a lot of other things, too, but you don't seem to worry about that when putting a stumbling block in your brother's way and pulling the speck out of his eye, do you?

BTW: what does the Bible say about putting prohibitions on marriage? Hint: the answer's in 1 Timothy, Chapter 4.

Originally Posted by Muffled

As for Jesus not saying anything about homosexuality, the law stands since Jesus claims to be the fulfillment of the law and he did not abnegate it by redefining it.

So you keep kosher then, right?

[Mestemia]

Originally Posted by Muffled

The Bible clearly indicates that sex between one male and one female who are married is what God intended. All else is sin. Even marriage is limited to those who are not family members (incest). So the whole idea of legitimizing sexual perversion by marriage is bogus. Marriage does not legitimize sin.

As for Jesus not saying anything about homosexuality, the law stands since Jesus claims to be the fulfillment of the law and he did not abnegate it by redefining it.

You assume to much.

1. You assume that Gods intentions are relevant to the law.
2. You assume that Gods intentions are to be forced upon those who could care less what God intended.
3. You assume that perversity is absolute and not subjective.
4. You assume that what your deity considers sin applies to everyone.
5. You assume that since Jesus said nothing about it, that you can merely put in whatever you like.

[sandy whitelinger]

Originally Posted by Scuba Pete

I am afraid that those who claim Hate as a Christian value are the ones redefining Christianity AWAY from the scriptures.

That is probably true but has nothing to do with my comment.

[sandy whitelinger]

Originally Posted by Muffled

Since you don't have a clue as to what Christiaity is, I wouldn't expect you to know that I am not inventing anything.

Your not Mball, so the comment wasn't addressed to you and it is commpletely off base. Go sit in the corner.

[sandy whitelinger]

Originally Posted by mball1297

Why not? Everyone else invents their own. (Although I don't see how following Christ's example could ever be considered not-Christian. After all, the term "Christian" was coined for a reason.)

Let's go back and look at your statement a little more carefully:
Quote:
Originally Posted by mball1297
Also, I would submit that a truer way of looking at it is that people who support gay rights are the true Christians (as in following Christ's example), whereas those who oppose them are not really Christians.


The implication here is that Christ would support gay rights. First, since there is no recorded interaction between Christ and an homosecual, we need to look elsewhere for insight. Perhaps we can look at His interaction with adulterers. I never saw where Christ stood up for adulterers' rights. If I remember correctly He forgave them their sin and told them to go and sin no more.

So when you write the Mball bible you may want to add an encounter with an homosexual so you can refer to it.