Homosexuality: Are there any biblical arguements for it?

[Bereta_Eder]

Originally posted by Spiffor
IIRC, the word "sodomite" womes back many, many times in the Ancient Testament, even when not referring to people from Sodom.
I don't think it is that outstretching to assume "sodomites" are homosexuals, or for the instance any people who are indulging non-reproductive sex.
I don't recall "Sodomites" being painted in a good light at any point of the Bible.

good point spiffor. I think the word sodomite is older than greek. dont have a clue about its etymology. might be interesting to know what it meant at that time it was written.

[Ben Kenobi]

Paiktis:

I don't think that "God" is all or perfectly described in the Holy Scriptures if He exists at all. But if He is, gays go to hell.

As will anyone who is unrepentant.

No different for gay people as well as for other people.

Leviticus 18 seems to be a reasonable collection of standards against incest, homosexuality and beastiality but what about Leviticus 20. Should adultery and homosexuality be punishable by death? Its in the Bible but you don't hear people arguing for that. Its just too convenient to pick out what your looking for and avoid the rest.

Frogman:

Excellent point. Why do we think that adultery should not merit a death sentence? What has changed between then and now?

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by paiktis22
God hated gays. He thought they should burn in hell.
Spin it anyway you want, you will just be funny.

How about we go with the truth instead of your own preconcieved prejudices?

[Bereta_Eder]

Originally posted by obiwan18
Paiktis:



As will anyone who is unrepentant.

No different for gay people as well as for other people.

that's ok. if God is to put a man like me in hell, then so be it. he's wrong. I'm not perfect or a saint but I'm not a criminal either. Also if God is to put in hell someone for simply not believing at his existance whereas he hs lived his life humanly then too bad, there will be more revolutions in heavens

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by obiwan18
Excellent point. Why do we think that adultery should not merit a death sentence? What has changed between then and now?

We don't need to reproduce so badly, because there is no population shortage right now. So, there is no need to threaten people of a supranatural punishment if they don't behave according to the necessities of reproduction.

[Ben Kenobi]

Dr. Strangelove:

From the NIV

Genesis 19:3-5

But he insisted so strongly that they did go with him and entered his house. He prepared a meal for them, baking bread without yeast, and they ate. 4 Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom-both young and old-surrounded the house. 5 They called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them."

Nothing about Sodom using rape as punishment.

What version of the bible are you using?

[Ben Kenobi]

That is, "rather than forbidding male homosexuality, it simply restricts where it may occur."

Boris:

As always, the passage at hand, from the NIV:

Lev 19:22-23

" 'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.

" 'Do not have sexual relations with an animal and defile yourself with it. A woman must not present herself to an animal to have sexual relations with it; that is a perversion."

None of this sophistry with 'beds' that you seem so inclined to present.

As for your second point, try actually reading the chapter. Versus 6-24 each list violations of the Law with respect to sexual matters. Ït's not just one verse, but many that bear the exact same structure and format for presenting the violations of the Law.

Spiffor

We don't need to reproduce so badly, because there is no population shortage right now. So, there is no need to threaten people of a supranatural punishment if they don't behave according to the necessities of reproduction.

First off, we do have a population shortage in the West, particularly in Europe.

Secondly, it does not follow that population growth is the reason for adultery.

If there was such a lack of people, why would they be willing to kill one in order to prevent adultery? It makes no sense.

[Bereta_Eder]

minor threadjack since Ming closed my thread saying that there are too many trheads about religion, if someone likes to comment please do




what annoys me the most about christianity
For me it's not the do's and onnot, the blah, blah, blahs.

In the end of the day God is about one thing and that is love. And I'm of course alright with that as would be any non psychopathic person.


There's one thing that bothers me though.


The apocalyspe and the end of the world.


Do you mean to say that all that we have achieved, all our struggles and fights and torments for the betternment of us, the human race, will all be in vain?

That someone is going to come from above and say: game over. thanks for playing, now it stops?


That's too damn fatalistic. Unacceptable. Doesn't make sense and it is unfair.


Sincerely hope this is not the case.


I believe eventually the human race will achieve better and better conditions for itself always aiming for the perfect.

To have a God coming down and put an end to all our struggles, annuling all the pains to imrpove what we have started with is what annoys me the most.

[Spiffor]

Obiwan :
Indeed, I was rather oriented towards the punishment of homosexuals and masturbaters. I don't remember male adulterism being that harshly sentenced by the Ancient Testament (however, I remember Onan was highly encouraged to **** his brother's wife).

Another thing that has changed through the ages is the reduced influence of religions in the earthly business. Therefore, rulers are less prone to favor religious punishments to earthly behaviours. That's why illegal abortions or sodomies would rather be punished by fines or imprisonment, rather than by the promise to go to hell.
Add the "disenchantment of the world" (don't know the exact English saying) to the picture, and you have religious punishments that are highly ineffectual in today's western societies.

[Spiffor]

Paiktis :
As I wanted to say in the other thread (but Ming beated me to it )
If you don't believe in religion, or at least in religious lore, it makes you feel much better .

[Bereta_Eder]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Paiktis :
As I wanted to say in the other thread (but Ming beated me to it )
If you don't believe in religion, or at least in religious lore, it makes you feel much better .

Actually I think that Christians feel much better They have something to hold on

[Bereta_Eder]

not the fanatics though of course. for them it's either god or drugs

[Ben Kenobi]

Genesis 37:7-8

"But Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the LORD's sight; so the LORD put him to death.

Then Judah said to Onan, 'Lie with your brother's wife and fulfill your duty to her as a brother-in-law to produce offspring for your brother.' "

Spiffor:

Kind of hard to commit adultery with your dead brother's wife.

For the answer to my question I was looking more for a discussion of the limits to civil authority, and the relationship between civil authority and the church. Now these are quite seperate, whereas before, the punishment would be determined by the church.

Paiktis: At least you believe in equal-opportunity.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by obiwan18
Kind of hard to commit adultery with your dead brother's wife.

But wasn't Onan married ?

For the answer to my question I was looking more for a discussion of the limits to civil authority, and the relationship between civil authority and the church. Now these are quite seperate, whereas before, the punishment would be determined by the church.

Yes, I think so too. But I also think the Church now has to fear something it never had to fear to the same extent before : the loss of believers. If you scare your believers too much, they'll go see elsewhere or will stop believing in your religion. That is quite a consumerist approach, but I'm sure it's taken into account : you simply can't afford to threaten or torture your believers like in the good old days now.

[Ben Kenobi]

But wasn't Onan married?

Nope.

But I also think the Church now has to fear something it never had to fear to the same extent before : the loss of believers. If you scare your believers too much, they'll go see elsewhere or will stop believing in your religion. That is quite a consumerist approach.

Not really. The reasoning is along these idea that true faith cannot be compelled. If people do not agree with the church, they are free to leave. The church does not operate, (or at least it should not,) along the lines of customer satisfaction.