Why is there no outcry from the Christian Right against divorce?

[Shad]

But there are none prohibiting it, but there are verses prohibiting divorce.

Wrong. Leviticus 18:22, Romans 1:26-27. Now extrapolate son

 

[Jainarayan]

Wrong. Leviticus 18:22, Romans 1:26-27. Now extrapolate son

I see no reference to marriage. Btw, how does one lie with a male as with a woman? Ancient Israelite women must’ve been pretty kinky. I guess if they were sports fans they could both watch a game on tv while having sex.

 

[Shad]

I see no reference to marriage.

Now look up what an abomination is.

Btw, how does one lie with a male as with a woman? Ancient Israelite women must’ve been pretty kinky.

Sexual relations like sodomy

I guess if they were sports fans they could both watch a game on tv while having sex.

They would be trying to remove the demons holding all those people in the box in their living room.

 

[Jainarayan]

Now look up what an abomination is.



Sexual relations like sodomy



They would be trying to remove the demons holding all those people in the box in their living room.

You can’t keep interpreting it to suit you and expect to be taken seriously.

And don’t get me started on the other Leviticus prohibitions that Christians blithely overlook while focusing fixating on sex.

 

[Spartan]

Why should I? I’m not Christian, I’m not hung up on who gets married or divorced. I’m pointing out hypocrisy.

There's no hypocrisy. And to those who demand a perfect church, if you ever find one don't join it or you'll screw it up.

 

[Shad]

You can’t keep interpreting it to suit you and expect to be taken seriously.

I interpreted nothing really. I told you to look up what an abomination was in biblical context. You declined to look it seems.

And don’t get me started on the other Leviticus prohibitions that Christians blithely overlook while focusing fixating on sex.

Christians cherry-pick all the time.

*I am not a Christian btw. Ergo I am not hung up on having to rationalize the Bible being against homosexual acts or why slavery is suddenly bad now but was good a few millennia ago. I can read the text as is without the mental gymnastics.

 

[Jainarayan]

There's no hypocrisy. And to those who demand a perfect church, if you ever find one don't join it or you'll screw it up.

Once more:

• Conservative Christians overlook divorce, which Jesus denounced. They don’t lobby for legislation to ban divorce.
• Conservative Christians fight tooth and nail to ban same sex marriage, which is not mentioned in the Bible.

 

[epronovost]

Wrong. Leviticus 18:22, Romans 1:26-27. Now extrapolate son

If you take into consideration the views of Ancient Hebrew on sexuality and that of the Romans to whome the other passage is adressed to, this might not be a condamnation of homosexuality or even of homosexual sexual relationship, but of a specific sexual practice that is of a man being penetrated by another man. Homosexual sex doesn't require penetrative sex though it's a common practice. The idea of treating a fellow man like a woman by making him the "passive" and "dominated" agent in sexual intercourse was considered wrong for it's denigrating and dishonorable for him. That's why for Romans penetrative homosexual sex was only tolerable when it was done as the "dominant" partner in the context of pederastry (so with a boy, not a man), a slave or an ex-slave (so not a free man). Temple prostitution was also a thing for a little while in Ancient Hebrew society, but was banned later on. There are hints that Ancient Hebrews were assessing sexuality very much like Romans and other civilisation of the time. The idea of defining sexuality by attraction like we do emerged more recently.

Then of course there is the entire issue of lesbianism which is not mentionned all that much in sacred texts and was probably considered as much less important.

 

[shmogie]

Cool. Gay marriage did the same, since the official Lutheran church in Sweden happily marry gays nowadays. For instance.

Ciao

- viole

Classic example, thank you. They deny the words of Christ. Who cares what He says ?

 

[shmogie]

Once more:

• Conservative Christians overlook divorce, which Jesus denounced. They don’t lobby for legislation to ban divorce.
• Conservative Christians fight tooth and nail to ban same sex marriage, which is not mentioned in the Bible.

What is a Conservative Christian ?

So Christ says marriage is between one an and one woman. All cases of marriage or marriage related verses in the Bible are about one man, and one woman.

The Bible never mentions sex with dead bodies, either. What do you infer from that ?

 

[viole]

Classic example, thank you. They deny the words of Christ. Who cares what He says ?

Not many, Apparently.

Time to toss Christianity into the trash bin of history, and finally leave our superstitious and demons haunted infancy behind.

Ciao

- viole

 

[shmogie]

Groups f Jews

You asserted that homosexuals were executed...I'm asking who you believe executed homosexuals?

Does he? I haven't noticed that.
How can it be designated a 'sin' without a strong overtone of universal condemnation?

Further, no one has trouble ignoring Paul when he tells us slaves should be good little slaves and stop their b itchin',

So why would we have any trouble ignoring Paul when he gives his personal views on sexual matters? He's entirely ignorant of what the 21st century knows about sexuality.
It means they're excluded, penalized, declared inferior.
Unrepentant for what? Being homosexual? How can that be any more of a "sin" than having red hair or being left-handed?
That contradicts everything you've just said. It's NOT an administrative issue to brand someone as inferior because of some or other selected "sin" ─ it's a moral judgment, an assertion of the superiority of the one who judges over the one who's judged.

Why are some churches so obsessed with sex?

The Jews killed Jewish homosexuals, as far as I know there was no Roman mobs in Judea.

Why do you think Paul told Christian slaves to do their jobs and keep quiet ? Do you know what happened to slaves who didn´t do their job or complained ? They got beaten or killed. What could that possibly accomplish ? Paul told them this for their own safety.

I note you overlooked the verse where Paul says they were to take every opportunity gain their freedom.

Moral judgements have absolutely nothing to do with superiority of one over another. It is about one meeting an established moral standard, and one not.

No one is forced to join a church. When they volunteer and want to join a Church, they swear they will accept the behavior standards of the Church. If they choose not to accept the standards, that is their right. The Church has the right to enforce the established standard.

You adhere to the social concept that homosexuality is a status that is inherent in people at birth. However, though sciences has a plethora of hypotheses to this effect, there is no established theory, and no consensus as to how this occurs.

The idea is not proven.

Perhaps necrophiliacs are born with that particular sexual proclivity. They certainly don´t, can´t, harm the objects of their love, would you have the Church accept them if in fact they cannot help themselves ?

The Church is not obsessed with sex.

I have never attended a church that was obsessed with sex, so I can´t answer your question.

If the truth be known, in 40 years of Church attendance, half of those years in Church leadership, I have never heard homosexuality ever discussed. I am not aware of any disciplinary action ever taken against a homosexual, though I was part of the body within the Church that would take that action. There were some cases of adultery that had to be dealt with, but as to sex, that´ś it.

I have discussed it infinitely more in RF, and always in response to an attack on the Church on the matter.

Liberal RFers are the ones who appear to be obsessed by sex, and are the ones who demand that the church conform to their idea of what the church should be. Some denominations have caved, some never
will.

 

[shmogie]

Why?

read the post

 

[shmogie]

Not many, Apparently.

Time to toss Christianity into the trash bin of history, and finally leave our superstitious and demons haunted infancy behind.

Ciao

- viole

Never going to happen.

 

[Jainarayan]

What is a Conservative Christian ?

Christian right - Wikipedia

Christ says marriage is between one an and one woman.

So why is divorce legal except in cases of adultery?

 

[Spartan]

Once more:

• Conservative Christians overlook divorce, which Jesus denounced.

Nope.

• Conservative Christians fight tooth and nail to ban same sex marriage, which is not mentioned in the Bible.

Same sex sin is mentioned numerous times in the Bible. Same sex marriage, then, is just institutionalized sin. Nowhere is it approved in the Bible.

 

[Jainarayan]

Nope.

Same sex sin is mentioned numerous times in the Bible. Same sex marriage, then, is just institutionalized sin. Nowhere is it approved in the Bible.

Stop diverting the focus onto same sex marriage and tell me why Christians are not lobbying for divorce to be banned. Aren’t both a sin? The subject of this thread is Christians wanting a ban on same sex marriage but saying nothing about divorce. Why? All I ask is why they’ve lobbied against same sex marriage but not divorce. Can you answer that?

 

[shmogie]

What people fail to realize is that the issue is one of legal contracts, not religion. Marriage was originally just contractual, to keep properties within a family, clan, or tribe. Most same sex couples don't care if they can get married in a religious institution. And no marriage is legal or valid anywhere without a state civil license. Clergy are permitted to sign marriage licenses only as a nod to tradition. But without that license, God himself could officiate at a wedding and no government agency, or any other institution for that matter, would recognize it. So quite honestly, it is religious institutions that have co-opted and changed the original meaning of marriage.

And having ruled in Loving v. Virginia the US Supreme Court established that marriage is a fundamental right. That set the stage for Obergefell v. Hodges, in which the Court further ruled that marriage is an equal right for all persons of marriageable age, regardless of orientation of the spouses.

God bless the Supreme Court of the United States of America.



Why would you think that would happen?

I don´t find marriage mentioned anywhere in the Constitution. Virtually anything that requires a license is not a right.

Rights are inherent, not granted or rescinded by the government.

 

[shmogie]

Why do you care so long as the person is sincere in their choices and beliefs? What is so different between a marriage and a civil union that you say it is like the difference between a flying machine and a non-flying horse (Pegasus excluded)?

And if your answer is your personal feeling in the matter...why should other care about that?

Because I care about the continuous manipulation and degradation of the language.

 

[sooda]

You don't go to church much, do you? I've yet to be in a church that approves of divorce, or one that fails to speak out against it. Also, some divorces are legitimate according to Jesus (Matthew 19:9). But I have been in a church that approves of same sex marriage, which is nothing more than institutionalized sin. And that's an abomination.

Same sex marriage is a civil right in the US.. The "abomination/sin" part is a matter for God to judge, not you.