Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-26-2015, 12:22 PM
 
32,516 posts, read 37,183,567 times
Reputation: 32581

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC View Post




It's not about approval... but a level of civility and truth in simply recognizing what I am saying instead of putting yourself in an adversarial position and putting words in my posts that I never stated.
Oh. So I need to be an agreeable little poster and not be adversarial. Hmmmm...I should put a buck in a jar every time a fundamentalist gives me the shaky finger. It would make a nice donation to GLAAD at the end of the year. (I'd do it every time a fundamentalist complains about his fellow posters....but I'd have no money left for food.)


p.s. Had you not made that remark about Wardendresden .....I'd have not responded to your post. If you're going to complain about people being adversarial....glass houses and all that. A buck is going into the jar in Warden's honor since he gets the shaky finger every time he says something the fundamentalists don't like. Heck.....I'll make it a fiver.

Last edited by DewDropInn; 08-26-2015 at 12:38 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-26-2015, 01:12 PM
 
45,582 posts, read 27,196,139 times
Reputation: 23898
Quote:
Originally Posted by DewDropInn View Post
Oh. So I need to be an agreeable little poster and not be adversarial. Hmmmm...I should put a buck in a jar every time a fundamentalist gives me the shaky finger. It would make a nice donation to GLAAD at the end of the year. (I'd do it every time a fundamentalist complains about his fellow posters....but I'd have no money left for food.)


p.s. Had you not made that remark about Wardendresden .....I'd have not responded to your post. If you're going to complain about people being adversarial....glass houses and all that. A buck is going into the jar in Warden's honor since he gets the shaky finger every time he says something the fundamentalists don't like. Heck.....I'll make it a fiver.
I don't care about being agreeable. I guess my main issue is that you took my post out of context from another area, and brought the issue here in an adversarial manner. And that you misrepresent my position on the issue - why, I don't know, but whatever. Freak80 gets it... you choose to make stuff up.

Let me clarify for you my position.
  • Homosexual activity is sin.
  • Even though people are trying to force the definition of marriage to include those engaging in homosexual behavior - God does not recognize that relationship as a marriage.
  • The behavior is a major health risk - and therefore should be avoided.
  • Nobody should be physically harmed by others because they practice homosexuality.
  • It is a sin like all other sins of unfaithfulness against God. However, it is also different in that because it is a sexual sin, it affects the people themselves (which is unlike all other sins).
  • The primary need of those who practice homosexuality is Jesus Christ. It is not to clean up their behavior. Christ can work on one's behavior once He joins Himself to them.

Warden is hyper sensitive on the gay issue. That's why he commented. Plus he has some thing about because I am black, I should have some sensitivity for what gays endure - so every so often he will throw some racial comments in his posts towards me - like he did earlier.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2015, 01:37 PM
 
Location: Tennessee
10,688 posts, read 7,715,732 times
Reputation: 4674
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC View Post
I don't care about being agreeable. I guess my main issue is that you took my post out of context from another area, and brought the issue here in an adversarial manner. And that you misrepresent my position on the issue - why, I don't know, but whatever. Freak80 gets it... you choose to make stuff up.

Let me clarify for you my position.
  • Homosexual activity is sin.
  • Even though people are trying to force the definition of marriage to include those engaging in homosexual behavior - God does not recognize that relationship as a marriage.
  • The behavior is a major health risk - and therefore should be avoided.
  • Nobody should be physically harmed by others because they practice homosexuality.
  • It is a sin like all other sins of unfaithfulness against God. However, it is also different in that because it is a sexual sin, it affects the people themselves (which is unlike all other sins).
  • The primary need of those who practice homosexuality is Jesus Christ. It is not to clean up their behavior. Christ can work on one's behavior once He joins Himself to them.

Warden is hyper sensitive on the gay issue. That's why he commented. Plus he has some thing about because I am black, I should have some sensitivity for what gays endure - so every so often he will throw some racial comments in his posts towards me - like he did earlier.
Like God's warning to the Israelites to treat the sojourner in their land fairly and decently (and not as a sinner) because they themselves were once sojourners in another land---so too the parallel is what I draw to your attention. Enslaved as a result of bible teaching, now escaping it but using it to enslave others. It isn't important to me that YOU don't get it. I just want to be an encouragement to some young homosexual that they are as important to God as anyone else--and God loves them just the way they are.

I don't even disagree that the Bible is at best vague on the subject of homosexuality--it is. On the other hand when two different views are available I always choose the one that fits in with how Jesus viewed people---as acceptable despite being Gentile, a Samaritan with a different bible (which they had), or a prostitute, or an "unclean" woman who dared to touch Him.

You simply choose over and over to select scripture as being condemning of other people, their beliefs, and their actions. It just doesn't hold water with the way Jesus treated them. So while you may be biblically knowledgeable, you never choose the high road and leave it to God to sort out. You choose to join sides with those engaged in baseness.

And why have so many homosexuals committed suicide after listening to the teaching of YOUR views on homosexuality? Two men in the nineties even admitted to killing a homosexual couple "because God didn't like them." That seems to me to be a sin far greater than a sexual sin.

Finally, there is plenty of reason to believe Jesus healed the servant of a centurion who was keeping the boy for sexual purposes--a quite common behavior among better heeled Roman soldiers. But you never consider it a possibility--you dismiss it outright thereby displaying the judgment that lies in your heart rather than the acceptance of others that lies in the hearts of Christ followers.

Good luck with that attitude at YOUR judgment.

DewDropInn, if I send you a post office box number could you send that five dollars directly to it???
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2015, 01:42 PM
 
Location: On the brink of WWIII
21,088 posts, read 29,227,920 times
Reputation: 7812
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC View Post
I don't care about being agreeable. I guess my main issue is that you took my post out of context from another area, and brought the issue here in an adversarial manner. And that you misrepresent my position on the issue - why, I don't know, but whatever. Freak80 gets it... you choose to make stuff up.

Let me clarify for you my position.
  • Homosexual activity is sin.
  • Even though people are trying to force the definition of marriage to include those engaging in homosexual behavior - God does not recognize that relationship as a marriage.
  • The behavior is a major health risk - and therefore should be avoided.
  • Nobody should be physically harmed by others because they practice homosexuality.
  • It is a sin like all other sins of unfaithfulness against God. However, it is also different in that because it is a sexual sin, it affects the people themselves (which is unlike all other sins).
  • The primary need of those who practice homosexuality is Jesus Christ. It is not to clean up their behavior. Christ can work on one's behavior once He joins Himself to them.


Warden is hyper sensitive on the gay issue. That's why he commented. Plus he has some thing about because I am black, I should have some sensitivity for what gays endure - so every so often he will throw some racial comments in his posts towards me - like he did earlier.
You really need to clarify this by saying YOUR OPINION and not "position."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2015, 02:15 PM
 
32,516 posts, read 37,183,567 times
Reputation: 32581
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wardendresden View Post

DewDropInn, if I send you a post office box number could you send that five dollars directly to it???
Since I got another lecture (which included a complaint about your deportment - A twofer!) ... it's been bumped up to a ten. Take Mrs Warden out for a couple of caramel macchiatos.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2015, 02:37 PM
 
45,582 posts, read 27,196,139 times
Reputation: 23898
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wardendresden View Post
Finally, there is plenty of reason to believe Jesus healed the servant of a centurion who was keeping the boy for sexual purposes--a quite common behavior among better heeled Roman soldiers. But you never consider it a possibility--you dismiss it outright thereby displaying the judgment that lies in your heart rather than the acceptance of others that lies in the hearts of Christ followers.
I am pretty much done with the topic for now... but have to ask... the bold above - what is the Scripture reference for that? I have never heard that one before.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2015, 03:04 PM
 
Location: Tennessee
10,688 posts, read 7,715,732 times
Reputation: 4674
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC View Post
I am pretty much done with the topic for now... but have to ask... the bold above - what is the Scripture reference for that? I have never heard that one before.
Enlightenment for pondering:

Many of us are familiar with the Gospel story where Jesus healed the servant of a Roman centurion. This story is recorded in Matthew 8:5-13 and Luke 7:1-10. In Matthew, we are told that the centurion came to Jesus to plead for the healing of his servant. Jesus said he was willing to come to the centurion’s house, but the centurion said there was no need for Jesus to do so — he believed that if Jesus simply spoke the word, his servant would be healed. Marveling at the man’s faith, Jesus pronounced the servant healed. Luke tells a similar story.

Just another miracle, right?

In the original language, the importance of this story for gay, lesbian, and bisexual Christians is much clearer. The Greek word used in Matthew’s account to refer to the servant of the centurion is pais. In the language of the time, pais had three possible meanings depending upon the context in which it was used. It could mean “son or boy;” it could mean “servant,” or it could mean a particular type of servant — one who was “his master’s male lover.” Often these lovers were younger than their masters, even teenagers.

The idea of buying a teen lover seems repugnant. But we have to place this in the context of ancient cultural norms. In ancient times, commercial transactions were the predominant means of forming relationships. Under the law, the wife was viewed as the property of the husband, with a status just above that of slave. Moreover, in Jesus’ day, a boy or girl was considered of marriageable age upon reaching his or her early teens. It was not uncommon for boys and girls to marry at age 14 or 15. (See note 19.) Nor was it uncommon for an older man to marry a young girl. Fortunately civilization has advanced, but these were the norms in the culture of Jesus’ day.

In that culture, if you were a gay man who wanted a male “spouse,” you achieved this, like your heterosexual counterparts, through a commercial transaction — purchasing someone to serve that purpose. A servant purchased to serve this purpose was often called a pais.


The word boy in English offers a rough comparison. Like pais, the word boy can be used to refer to a male child. But in the slave South in the nineteenth century, boy was also often used to refer to male slaves. The term boy can also be used as a term of endearment. For example, Jeff’s father often refers to his mother as “his girl.” He doesn’t mean that she is a child, but rather that she is his “special one.” The term boy can be used in the same way, as in “my boy” or “my beau.” In ancient Greek, pais had a similar range of meanings.

The Bible provides three key pieces of textual and circumstantial evidence. First, in the Luke passage, several additional Greek words are used to describe the one who is sick. Luke says this pais was the centurion’s entimos doulos. The word doulos is a generic term for slave, and was never used in ancient Greek to describe a son/boy. Thus, Luke’s account rules out the possibility the sick person was the centurion’s son; his use of doulos makes clear this was a slave. However, Luke also takes care to indicate this was no ordinary slave. The word entimos means “honored.” This was an “honored slave” (entimos doulos) who was his master’s pais. Taken together, the three Greek words preclude the possibility the sick person was either the centurion’s son or an ordinary slave, leaving only one viable option — he was his master’s male lover.

A second piece of evidence is found in verse 9 of Matthew’s account. In the course of expressing his faith in Jesus’ power to heal by simply speaking, the centurion says, “When I tell my slave to do something, he does it.” By extension, the centurion concludes that Jesus is also able to issue a remote verbal command that must be carried out. When speaking here of his slaves, the centurion uses the word doulos. But when speaking of the one he is asking Jesus to heal, he uses only pais. In other words, when he is quoted in Matthew, the centurion uses pais only when referring to the sick person. He uses a different word, doulos, when speaking of his other slaves, as if to draw a distinction. (In Luke, it is others, not the centurion, who call the sick one an entimos doulos.) Again, the clear implication is that the sick man was no ordinary slave. And when pais was used to describe a servant who was not an ordinary slave, it meant only one thing — a slave who was the master’s male lover.

The third piece of evidence is circumstantial. In the Gospels, we have many examples of people seeking healing for themselves or for family members. But this story is the only example of someone seeking healing for a slave. The actions described are made even more remarkable by the fact that this was a proud Roman centurion (the conqueror/oppressor) who was humbling himself and pleading with a Jewish rabbi (the conquered/oppressed) to heal his slave. The extraordinary lengths to which this man went to seek healing for his slave is much more understandable, from a psychological perspective, if the slave was his beloved companion.

All the textual and circumstantial evidence in the Gospels points in one direction. For objective observers, the conclusion is inescapable: In this story Jesus healed a man’s male lover. When understood this way, the story takes on a whole new dimension.

As he made his way to Jesus, he probably worried about the possibility that Jesus, like other Jewish rabbis, would take a dim view of his homosexual relationship. Perhaps he even considered lying. He could simply use the word duolos. That would have been accurate, as far as it went. But the centurion probably figured if Jesus was powerful enough to heal his lover, he was also powerful enough to see through any half-truths.

So the centurion approaches Jesus and bows before him. “Rabbi, my . . . ,” the word gets caught in his throat. This is it — the moment of truth. Either Jesus will turn away in disgust, or something wonderful will happen. So, the centurion clears his throat and speaks again. “Rabbi, my pais — yes, my pais lies at home sick unto death.” Then he pauses and waits for a second that must have seemed like an eternity. The crowd of good, God-fearing people surrounding Jesus probably became tense. This was like a gay man asking a televangelist to heal his lover. What would Jesus do?

Without hesitation, Jesus says, “Then I will come and heal him.”

It’s that simple! Jesus didn’t say, “Are you kidding? I’m not going to heal your pais so you can go on living in sin!” Nor did he say, “Well, it shouldn’t surprise you that your pais is sick; this is God’s judgment on your relationship.”

Instead, Jesus’ words are simple, clear, and liberating for all who have worried about what God thinks of gay relationships. “I will come and heal him.”

At this point, the centurion says there is no need for Jesus to travel to his home. He has faith that Jesus’ word is sufficient. Jesus then turns to the good people standing around him — those who were already dumbfounded that he was willing to heal this man’s male lover. To them, Jesus says in verse 10 of Matthew’s account, “I have not found faith this great anywhere in Israel.” In other words, Jesus holds up this gay centurion as an example of the type of faith others should aspire to.

Jesus didn’t just tolerate this gay centurion. He said he was an example of faith — someone we all should strive to be like.

Is it absolutely positively that way--no, there were multiple meanings to pais. But a Roman centurion in a far land, forbidden to marry by the Roman government, it is more likely that this boy was a male lover than not.


Jesus went a little further than baking a cake for the centurion. And the above is a message that will preach quite well---although the audience who needs to hear it are likely to have their eyes closed and their hands over their ears---fundamentalists posing as Christ followers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2015, 03:43 PM
 
Location: Texas
44,259 posts, read 64,375,553 times
Reputation: 73937
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC View Post
I don't care about being agreeable. I guess my main issue is that you took my post out of context from another area, and brought the issue here in an adversarial manner. And that you misrepresent my position on the issue - why, I don't know, but whatever. Freak80 gets it... you choose to make stuff up.

Let me clarify for you my position.
  • Homosexual activity is sin.
  • Even though people are trying to force the definition of marriage to include those engaging in homosexual behavior - God does not recognize that relationship as a marriage.
  • The behavior is a major health risk - and therefore should be avoided.
  • Nobody should be physically harmed by others because they practice homosexuality.
  • It is a sin like all other sins of unfaithfulness against God. However, it is also different in that because it is a sexual sin, it affects the people themselves (which is unlike all other sins).
  • The primary need of those who practice homosexuality is Jesus Christ. It is not to clean up their behavior. Christ can work on one's behavior once He joins Himself to them.
It's a good thing for you many people don't use their *position* to deny you lifesaving emergency care in the ER.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2015, 04:53 PM
 
63,815 posts, read 40,099,995 times
Reputation: 7876
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freak80 View Post
To be fair, the evangelical Christian MO is not to deny civil rights or unfairly discriminate, but to eliminate sin (preferably in other people). They see homosexuality as a sin, so they oppose gay marriage.
And THAT ^^^^ is the idiocy. God is concerned with what each of us do in our OWN lives . . . NOT what we do to others about what they do in their lives!!! If we want to eliminate sin . . . we need to focus on our own lives, period! We are EACH responsible for our own lives . . . a feature slowly evaporating from society . . . sad to say!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2015, 12:40 AM
 
23,654 posts, read 17,514,296 times
Reputation: 7472
Quote:
Originally Posted by zthatzmanz28 View Post
Why not have a few of your gay friends go into a bakery where Muslims bake and ask them for a cake.

Then if they are refused they can sue them...Someone has to be the test case, why not your friends?


Would a "christian" baker bake a cake for a birthday of a gay person? Or is that like participating and celebrating the person's life who is gay?
He is already married so I can't.

For your second question the baker did bake many cakes for the gay person for birthdays, etc. He just could not do the wedding cake for his religious convictions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:39 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top