Freedom to Marry Day Protest Planned

[cardaway]

Well of course there are study bibles (and many other sources including some excellent schlarly journals) that attempt exegetic analysis of scripture. Considering that particular hobby has been ongoing since before the Council of Trent, it's a little disingenuous to pass all of this off as a simple matter of applying ones self to understand.

The great ironic historical example of how "unclear" it is can be found in the Protestant Reformation. The fundamental principle was that the Roman Church had failed to follow scripture, and by following the clear meaning of the scriptures a true path could be found. Of course, the Protestant sects couldn't agree on what the clear meaning is and so they split and formed different chruches.

In a vain attempt to get back on topic:

The laws of the Christian faith, diversely interpreted as they are, make for a pretty unstable platform upon which to buid policy on any issue.

Well said on every point.

 

[LuvDuke]

Well of course there are study bibles (and many other sources including some excellent schlarly journals) that attempt exegetic analysis of scripture. Considering that particular hobby has been ongoing since before the Council of Trent, it's a little disingenuous to pass all of this off as a simple matter of applying ones self to understand.

The great ironic historical example of how "unclear" it is can be found in the Protestant Reformation. The fundamental principle was that the Roman Church had failed to follow scripture, and by following the clear meaning of the scriptures a true path could be found. Of course, the Protestant sects couldn't agree on what the clear meaning is and so they split and formed different chruches.

In a vain attempt to get back on topic:

The laws of the Christian faith, diversely interpreted as they are, make for a pretty unstable platform upon which to buid policy on any issue.

Hobby? It's an industry.

 

[JunieJay]

The laws of the Christian faith, diversely interpreted as they are, make for a pretty unstable platform upon which to buid policy on any issue.

And that is the bottom line isn't it?

 

[Laura]

Actually, only a small part. Jesus himself quoted (OT) Scripture.

Romans 1 & I Corinthians 6 refer to homosexual acts & homosexuals.

Yes, that's the whole Paul thing referred to in the USA Today opinion piece.

"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet."
Romans 1:26-27

Pederasty was practiced by the Romans, whom he was addressing here. Perhaps that's what he was referring to; in any case the "unnaturalness" was a result of turning away from God.

"Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever."
Romans 1:25

Besides, this only addresses men+men, not women+women. I guess lesbians are okay?

And what is "natural"?

I Corinthians 11:14--"Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears long hair, it is degrading to him? but if a woman has long hair it is her glory?"

As for I Corinthians 6:9-10--
"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."

So "homosexual offenders" are the target here. The word in Greek is malakoi. Not "paiderasste", the standard term at the time for homosexuals. Malakoi can mean "effeminate", "soft", "fine". (So will women inherit the kingdom of God?) Malakoi can also be translated as "loose", as in "loose morals", or "pliable".

Scripture doesn't appear to say we should.

Why not? If divorced people are just as much sinners as gays? And if all Christians disagree on the gay marriage debate, which denomination do we listen to?

 

[cardaway]

Hobby? It's an industry.

But it's on a non-profit basis... right?

 

[Mugg Mann]

But it's on a non-profit basis... right?

Methinks we would all be much better off if it was on a non-prophet basis as well...........

 

[LisaL]

It seems that Joe and Jimmie may share similar beliefs regarding homosexual marriage. What they have not had in common is the manner in which each shares that belief.

We didn't like Joe's intolerance. Let's make sure not to turn around and treat Jimmie in the same way Joe treated those who disagreed with him.

I learned that tolerance, true tolerance, can only be achieved by those who were willing to hear and to understand the views of others. Understanding is not acceptance. But it goes a long way to ensure civility and open communication.

Just my opinion. What do I know - I'm from CA.

 

[BuckNaked]

Just a short, but sincere sentiment here, then you guys can come after me, but...

I think when someone starts out a conversation saying basically that they are torn, and when it is obvious that the person is struggling to reconcile their deeply held religious beliefs with a conscience that tells them that the religious beliefs may not be right on target, ridiculing the beliefs doesn't help that person come to a place of reconciliation and understanding.

OK, flame away, I can take it.

ETA: not directed at any one person...I've just been reading the last few pages with great interest.

 

[BuckNaked]

LisaL, you and I were on the same wavelength!!

 

[LuvDuke]

It seems that Joe and Jimmie may share similar beliefs regarding homosexual marriage. What they have not had in common is the manner in which each shares that belief.

We didn't like Joe's intolerance. Let's make sure not to turn around and treat Jimmie in the same way Joe treated those who disagreed with him.

I learned that tolerance, true tolerance, can only be achieved by those who were willing to hear and to understand the views of others. Understanding is not acceptance. But it goes a long way to ensure civility and open communication.

Just my opinion. What do I know - I'm from CA.

There is no tolerance for discrimination and refusing people their civil rights.

And condemning an entire group of people to "back of the bus status" is discrimination and a violation of their civil rights. Frankly, I don't care if they claim the Bible gives them the right. The cross doesn't give them a place to hide behind.

 

[RickinNYC]

It seems that Joe and Jimmie may share similar beliefs regarding homosexual marriage. What they have not had in common is the manner in which each shares that belief.

We didn't like Joe's intolerance. Let's make sure not to turn around and treat Jimmie in the same way Joe treated those who disagreed with him.

I learned that tolerance, true tolerance, can only be achieved by those who were willing to hear and to understand the views of others. Understanding is not acceptance. But it goes a long way to ensure civility and open communication.
Just my opinion. What do I know - I'm from CA.

You are entirely 100% correct, but Joe does not try to understand anything about homosexuality beyond the "fact" that it fits his own narrow definition of normal. Plus, he blatantly calls us sinners, considers us immoral, and are deprecating on every level when speaking of the topic. That said, I don't find much reason to pander to his opinions in order to hope to sway him.

As I've said before, I'll readily admit I am vehemently, 1000% without question totally and completely without a doubt intolerant of that level of intolerance. Catch 22 but it's one I live with happily.

Just like him.

 

[JunieJay]

There is no tolerance for discrimination and refusing people their civil rights.

And condemning an entire group of people to "back of the bus status" is discrimination and a violation of their civil rights. Frankly, I don't care if they claim the Bible gives them the right. The cross doesn't give them a place to hide behind.

I'm with you Luvduke.

I'm happy to hear that Jimmie is struggling with this issue. If he is a true follower of Jesus Christ, he should be!

 

[cardaway]

It seems that Joe and Jimmie may share similar beliefs regarding homosexual marriage. What they have not had in common is the manner in which each shares that belief.

We didn't like Joe's intolerance. Let's make sure not to turn around and treat Jimmie in the same way Joe treated those who disagreed with him.

I learned that tolerance, true tolerance, can only be achieved by those who were willing to hear and to understand the views of others. Understanding is not acceptance. But it goes a long way to ensure civility and open communication.

Just my opinion. What do I know - I'm from CA.

If jimmiej always took the same high road, I would agree with you.

But he's somebody who doesn't have any problem joking that people who don't follow exactly what he does better get fire insurance and the like. Far from the perfect citizen you are seeing so far on this thread.

 

[MassJester]

Just a short, but sincere sentiment here, then you guys can come after me, but...

I think when someone starts out a conversation saying basically that they are torn, and when it is obvious that the person is struggling to reconcile their deeply held religious beliefs with a conscience that tells them that the religious beliefs may not be right on target, ridiculing the beliefs doesn't help that person come to a place of reconciliation and understanding.

OK, flame away, I can take it.

ETA: not directed at any one person...I've just been reading the last few pages with great interest.

Scripture has been quoted here as if it comes from some plain language, universally accepted truth, instead of one of the most controverted texts in human history.

I think the first shot across the water was describing homosexual conduct and marriage as "sinfull," the return fire against the foundational underpinnings of that belief were bought and paid for.

 

[RickinNYC]

Just a short, but sincere sentiment here, then you guys can come after me, but...

I think when someone starts out a conversation saying basically that they are torn, and when it is obvious that the person is struggling to reconcile their deeply held religious beliefs with a conscience that tells them that the religious beliefs may not be right on target, ridiculing the beliefs doesn't help that person come to a place of reconciliation and understanding.

OK, flame away, I can take it.

ETA: not directed at any one person...I've just been reading the last few pages with great interest.

Actually, I agree with this as well. When someone is torn or struggling, that means that they are at the very least, trying to understand. There are certain posters that aren't torn, nor are they struggling. They would rather insult, inflame, and make hateful comments than understand or accept.

JIMMIEJAY, I take back what I said in my previous post and apologize for mentioning you. Not sure if you saw it but I lumped you in the same equation when I should not have and I have since edited my previous statements

 

[cardaway]

There are somethings that are wrong no matter how nicely you word them, or what book you hide behind.

 

[LisaL]

If jimmiej always took the same high road, I would agree with you.

But he's somebody who doesn't have any problem joking that people who don't follow exactly what he does better get fire insurance and the like. Far from the perfect citizen you are seeing so far on this thread.

I've been away for a long time. I used to spend a lot of time on the debate board. I don't know Jimmie's history. I only know what I see here.




For the others, I understand what you are saying. If you will read my earlier post, maybe page 8, you will see I'm not on the attack. But if you're going to maintain your integrity when faced with a contentious issue and opponents, you have to keep it civil. You can only give account for your actions. It seems hypocritical to me.

So with that said, you can flame me all you want. I'm not the enemy. I'm just calling it like I see it. I've got no bias.

 

[cardaway]

So with that said, you can flame me all you want. I'm not the enemy. I'm just calling it like I see it. I've got no bias.

You consider my response a flame?

 

[LisaL]

You consider my response a flame?

Sorry, no. I just was saying I don't know Jimmie's rep on the boards.

 

[Andy B]

One of the interesting things about 'The Bible' is that it is a selection of various texts which were used in the same way but happened to be selected by a medievil thological conference. Those making the decisions were no more in touch with the truth than you or I.