If a single act of homosexuality is abomination in God's eyes then same-sex marriage must be evil to the infinite power (Old Testament, 10 Commandments)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Actually we read the entire Bible in the proper context:
Quote:
There were abominations that applied only to the Jews such as eating shellfish, rabbit, and pork, things that were typologically representative of purity before the Lord. God says “Speak to the sons of Israel saying . . . " God then lists out the creatures which they may eat and not eat and mentions the camel, rock badger, rabbit, pig, etc., . . . God specifically addresses the dietary laws “to the sons of Israel” (Lev. 11:2) and people he has chosen out of all the nations on the earth (Deut. 14:2)--not the rest of the nations.
However, there are abominations that did not apply only to Israel--but everyone.
“You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination. 23 Also you shall not have intercourse with any animal to be defiled with it, nor shall any woman stand before an animal to mate with it; it is a perversion. 24 Do not defile yourselves by any of these things; for by all these the nations which I am casting out before you have become defiled.”
The land became defiled due to the abominations of homosexuality and bestiality from those who lived in the land before the Jews, so it is not just an issue for the Jews under the Law (Lev. 18:22-29). God considered their homosexuality to be an abomination for everyone. So, the argument that we Christians are not under the Law doesn’t work because the non-Jews of ancient times were not under Jewish law, and their homosexuality was called an abomination.
Some people need an education in the difference between Mosaic ceremonial law vs overall moral law. Hint - nothing in the NT about shaving your beard or wearing certain clothes.
The very word used in Leviticus (translated as abomination) shows that it's a ritual prohibition, not a moral evil. Eating unclean things, sleeping with your wife while on her period, etc. are called the same word as same-sex relationships. Yet they're not moral evils.
Sorry, CARM is a right wing nutcase website. Their opinion is irrelevant. The fact that you take them as valuable (even most Conservatives think they're nuts) shows you really have no idea what you're talking about.
The world's leading expert on Leviticus, a Conservative Rabbi, said Leviticus does not condemn modern day gays. I'll take his opinion over CARM.
Sorry, CARM is a right wing nutcase website. Their opinion is irrelevant. The fact that you take them as valuable (even most Conservatives think they're nuts) shows you really have no idea what you're talking about.
The world's leading expert on Leviticus, a Conservative Rabbi, said Leviticus does not condemn modern day gays. I'll take his opinion over CARM.
Resorting to the attack the source, not the content tactic, I see. Your opinion of their website doesn't matter at all. If their commentary is wrong, prove it. Course much easier just to write them off as being nuts, right?
A Jewish rabbi doesn't recognize Jesus as being the Messiah who fulfilled the old convenant so his opinion is irrelevant.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,919,895 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by cupper3
Let's take your word for it that some of Leviticus applies to only Jews, and the rest to everyone.
How do we know which is which? Who determined that, and in what way?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Resorting to the attack the source, not the content tactic, I see. Your opinion of their website doesn't matter at all. If their commentary is wrong, prove it. Course much easier just to write them off as being nuts, right?
A Jewish rabbi doesn't recognize Jesus as being the Messiah who fulfilled the old convenant so his opinion is irrelevant.
Yoo hoo... Jeff.. still waiting for a response to the above.
To me, it is no different if you were hear passionately defending other forms of sexual immorality and calling on us to love and accept them for who they are.
Some sexuality are defensible because they are not immoral. Some are the opposite. Your error is in lumping them all in the one basket for propaganda effect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Because the media and homosexual groups are making it a very public and in your face issue.
It is a public issue, one relevant to our society today. The media is not forcing it on you. The media is reflecting the society around you. If this bothers you, simply sell your television.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Funny thing is I see your side as the one that gets all riled up if we dare not support the liberal gay agenda. I think it is pretty obvious that the vast majority of posts in this thread are pro-gay.
Which should tell you something given the vast majority of posts on this thread are from Christians too. Are you so certain that your interpretation of christianity is the one that is on the money? So far you have given no reason for us to think so, except "assert and repeat".
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
The topic of discussion is homosexuality, not the civil rights era.
Yet there are parallels to be drawn between the rhetoric used in both. Just because the topic is one thing, this does not mean parallels can not be drawn to another thing. That is how conversation works.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.