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 03-20-2016, 12:57 PM
 
Location: On the road
2,798 posts, read 2,667,001 times
Reputation: 3192

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerwade View Post
The reasons for the fall of the empire may have included: military overreach, the invasion by emboldened tribes of Huns and Visigoths from northern and central Europe, inflation, corruption; and political incompetence - just to name a few.

So much for flexing their muscles?


Current theory includes lead contamination from their plumbing as a principle trigger.

 
Old 03-20-2016, 02:40 PM
 
Location: Southern Oregon
17,071 posts, read 10,868,694 times
Reputation: 1871
Quote:
Originally Posted by TroutDude View Post
He's a one-trick pony. And has become a colossal bore.
Precisely. In every thread where he participates it is the same song and dance and we keep feeding it.

Wake up, people!
 
Old 03-20-2016, 03:03 PM
 
Location: Florida
77,013 posts, read 47,448,627 times
Reputation: 14806
Its funny how some people spew insults and when it's pointed out, all the anti-christians gang up against the victim to say "oh, you just like to play the victim".
 
Old 03-20-2016, 03:39 PM
 
Location: On the brink of WWIII
21,088 posts, read 29,125,285 times
Reputation: 7812
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40 View Post
What do evangelicals NOT understand? Discrimination is WRONG, is is ILLEGAL.

NO, the problem is the laws now cause a conflict between freedom of religion and broad based discrimination. Do you really thing EVERYTHING in life must be 100% equal or it is discrimination?
yes, if it is denied through the law, it is DISCRIMINATION...LEARN THE CONSTITUTION and UNDERSTAND law..
 
Old 03-20-2016, 05:47 PM
 
Location: Townsville
6,687 posts, read 2,849,493 times
Reputation: 5464
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40 View Post
You have to read the Bible with blinders on because it never speaks of homosexuality in a positive light.

This verse puts it along side slavery as sin:

We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers--and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine

1 Timothy 1:10

Care to explain to me how that verse is NOT talking about homosexuality?
Well, it might help to see the exact same chapter and verse from the KJV:

For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

The term "for those practicing homosexuality" NEVER appears in the KJV, NOR, more importantly, in the original texts of scripture. Any post-1946 Bible containing the terms "homosexual" or "homosexuality" are incorrect and should NEVER be used to make an anti-homosexual case for the Christian.

As for 'slavery', another 'interfered with' piece of scripture by the post-1946 authors? In actuality, it seems that Paul was fine with slavery as long as slaves were treated by their masters in a kinder, gentler way. Nowhere is slavery referred to as 'sin'.

That's two strikes against your Bible interpretations, Jeff, and I dare say strike three would come if you were to take on Romans 1:18-27 that I went into several pages back. No one has accepted the challenge that I threw out which was (paraphrased): Describe in exegetical detail where homosexuality per se is condemned other than as a worship practice affiliated with pagan idolatry. As said, so far no takers. No takers includes you, Jeff. And yet, you still persist in making your case against homosexuality by using corrupt terms from (apparently) bigoted contemporary Bible authors and generally misusing scripture in a manner that might be seen to be, um ...rather unChrist-like.
 
Old 03-20-2016, 05:57 PM
 
10,075 posts, read 5,703,508 times
Reputation: 2891
Quote:
Originally Posted by zthatzmanz28 View Post
yes, if it is denied through the law, it is DISCRIMINATION...LEARN THE CONSTITUTION and UNDERSTAND law..
Laws can be changed. It's not written in stone. Learn reality.
 
Old 03-20-2016, 06:08 PM
 
10,075 posts, read 5,703,508 times
Reputation: 2891
Quote:
Originally Posted by RomulusXXV View Post
Well, it might help to see the exact same chapter and verse from the KJV:

For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

The term "for those practicing homosexuality" NEVER appears in the KJV, NOR, more importantly, in the original texts of scripture. Any post-1946 Bible containing the terms "homosexual" or "homosexuality" are incorrect and should NEVER be used to make an anti-homosexual case for the Christian.



I believe "homosexual" is a fairly modern term so of course you don't find it in older manuscripts. But it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what the scripture is talking about. Men defiling themselves with other men. That's a homosexual act.

You ONLY have an argument if you can prove that it absolutely means something else.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RomulusXXV View Post

As for 'slavery', another 'interfered with' piece of scripture by the post-1946 authors? In actuality, it seems that Paul was fine with slavery as long as slaves were treated by their masters in a kinder, gentler way. Nowhere is slavery referred to as 'sin'.
Nothing more than picking and choosing verses here. There are other verses that clearly do not show a support of slavery and it is simply ignorance to compare the modern day concept of slavery to Biblical times as well.





Quote:
Originally Posted by RomulusXXV View Post

That's two strikes against your Bible interpretations, Jeff, and I dare say strike three would come if you were to take on Romans 1:18-27 that I went into several pages back. No one has accepted the challenge that I threw out which was (paraphrased): Describe in exegetical detail where homosexuality per se is condemned other than as a worship practice affiliated with pagan idolatry. As said, so far no takers. No takers includes you, Jeff. And yet, you still persist in making your case against homosexuality by using corrupt terms from (apparently) bigoted contemporary Bible authors and generally misusing scripture in a manner that might be seen to be, um ...rather unChrist-like.
There is nothing in the verse that says the sin was pagan worship. It says plain as day that men exchanged natural lusts for women for unnatural lusts with men. There is nothing you can say to change that. Furthermore, you have the problem of Leviticus 18:22–30.
 
Old 03-20-2016, 07:13 PM
 
Location: On the brink of WWIII
21,088 posts, read 29,125,285 times
Reputation: 7812
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40 View Post
Laws can be changed. It's not written in stone. Learn reality.
LAWS cannot be written to allow discrimination--KNOW REALITY..
 
Old 03-20-2016, 07:51 PM
 
10,075 posts, read 5,703,508 times
Reputation: 2891
Quote:
Originally Posted by zthatzmanz28 View Post
LAWS cannot be written to allow discrimination--KNOW REALITY..
what is the definition of discrimination?
 
Old 03-20-2016, 09:05 PM
 
Location: Townsville
6,687 posts, read 2,849,493 times
Reputation: 5464
Quote:
Originally Posted by RomulusXXV
Well, it might help to see the exact same chapter and verse from the KJV:

For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

The term "for those practicing homosexuality" NEVER appears in the KJV, NOR, more importantly, in the original texts of scripture. Any post-1946 Bible containing the terms "homosexual" or "homosexuality" are incorrect and should NEVER be used to make an anti-homosexual case for the Christian.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
I believe "homosexual" is a fairly modern term so of course you don't find it in older manuscripts. But it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what the scripture is talking about. Men defiling themselves with other men. That's a homosexual act.
Where on earth do you get "men defiling themselves with other men"? There is no specific gender mentioned here at all. Are you making this stuff up as you go? What you are (conveniently) interpreting is not what either the KJV or the original manuscript of scripture states. Even if they did (which they don't) you could just as well include heterosexuals among those who defile one another. It refers to 'them' ...NOT men. The key word would be 'defile' ...regardless of which gender is doing the defiling. If anything (and NO ONE knows what this text is referencing!) it would be those folks who 'defile' themselves with shrine temple prostitutes (both male and female) and Pagan idolatry sex rituals. Gay people (whatever intimacy they might get up to when in private) would not be seen as 'defiling' one another. Even if they were (which they are not) Paul would not have known what people do in private. I don't know how many times this needs to be said before some people catch on. The things that Paul refers to are 'early Christian Church related' and were either visible to the onlooker or within earshot of the listener. And, you can bet your bottom dollar that these things related to worship practices in some way ...worship practices that involved other than the ONE true God!

Where were these things occurring in this particular instance? In the growing Ephesian Church, that's where. It would appear that a major problem in the Ephesian Church was a heresy that combined the false doctrines of Gnosticism, decadent Judaism and false asceticism ...all of which probably require a discussion thread of their own.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
You ONLY have an argument if you can prove that it absolutely means something else.
I've already given 'my side' of the argument ...repeatedly, in fact. It's YOU that is leveling the charge against gay people. And, you're claiming to have the backing of your God ...the Bible. The onus is on you to prove your claims. I remain as ever ...there is no reference to homosexuality in the Bible other than in regard to Pagan worship practices and, perhaps, rape.

<sigh> I'm more and more sounding like a worn out record.


Quote:
Originally Posted by RomulusXXV
As for 'slavery', another 'interfered with' piece of scripture by the post-1946 authors? In actuality, it seems that Paul was fine with slavery as long as slaves were treated by their masters in a kinder, gentler way. Nowhere is slavery referred to as 'sin'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Nothing more than picking and choosing verses here.

There are other verses that clearly do not show a support of slavery and it is simply ignorance to compare the modern day concept of slavery to Biblical times as well.
Yeah, I know ...slavery in Bible times wasn't really slavery.

As for my picking and choosing verses, I never quoted a verse. All I said was that Paul preferred a more kind and gentler form of slavery which implies, of course, that slave owners generally mistreated their slaves.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
There is nothing in the verse that says the sin was pagan worship. It says plain as day that men exchanged natural lusts for women for unnatural lusts with men. There is nothing you can say to change that.
I have never attempted to change what that text says. It states what you say. HOWEVER, when placed in its proper context it DOES refer to the acts affiliated with Pagan idolatry.

I really DO feel the need to ask this. Are there those among us who have the verses 18-25 missing from their Bibles? Does your version of Romans 1 begin at verses 26-27? Well, I would suggest that you get a new Bible (I'm joshing, of course) or start your reading of Romans 1 AT THE BEGINNING! This should then open up a whole new world of understanding for you as to what the scripture is talking about!


Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Furthermore, you have the problem of Leviticus 18:22–30.
Leviticus offers no problem at all for the gay person. Actually, it's rather embarrassing that Leviticus is still used by some to justify 'gay-hatred' in the year 2016 where those of us who know better still have to fend off this nonsense.

I usually prefer not to do this but it's much easier to present a very short (8 minutes-plus) video that explains the Leviticus texts quite adequately. Why this video has become somewhat important for me is because I presented it on another forum several years ago and had a Jewish scholar authenticate its accuracy. Since then another couple of Jewish scholars have confirmed that it's pretty much 'spot on'.

Here is the video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_D5Oa5n1nY

Here are the comments both from me and from the Jewish scholar from the other Christian forum. I don't know if I'm allowed to name names or give the location of the other forum but will do so if asked. I can even supply the date and the page where this appears:

Me to *********: Since you appear to be quite knowledgeable of the Torah, I wonder if you would spend 8:28 of your time and view the below video entitled The Truth About Leviticus & Homosexuality ...?

Since I'm a defender on this forum of those that appear to be 'born' homosexual but are nevertheless condemned by many present-day Christians, it's essential to me that I speak as accurately as I'm able whenever I debate the 'clobber' passages of Leviticus (and other allegedly anti-gay scriptures) with others.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_D5Oa5n1nY

Would you say that the 'explanations' of the Leviticus 'clobber' passages as given in the video to be at least feasible based on what you know?


*********: I watched the video, and it's quite good. A trifle oversimplified when it comes to discussing other religions of the Bronze Age -- they weren't ALL obsessed with fertility rites and so on, and there were other contexts for "gay sex" as well, e.g. homosexual anal rape as a formal humiliation in war or feud -- but the analysis of the language of the Hebrew Bible is right on the money.

As I said, the Bible does not seem to be "aware," so to speak, of homosexuality as a sexual orientation; the reason the ACT is the point of reference is that it never occurred to the writers that anyone would do this because they WANTED to, or that one could be attracted to the same sex and want to live in a gay relationship.

Whatever. The fact is, we know things now that we didn't then, and the world is different. How many rules can one find in the Hebrew Bible that are no longer kept, or even understood in today's world? I eat shellfish, and often; I eat pork, I wear mixed fabrics, and when I had a garden I planted different crops together because they enriched the soil and kept the pests off each other. Anybody wearing a cotton/polyester shirt with clams or shrimp on his breath who points to these so-called "Clobber Passages" is either (a) ignorant or (b) a flaming hypocrite. I've got no patience for people who want to tell me that they "chose" to be straight and that gays can "choose" to change. That's nonsense.

Proof? Okay. CHOOSE TO BE GAY. Right now. You don't have to DO anything about it, mind; just CHOOSE to feel attracted to the other sex.

Can't be done.

My converting rabbi used to say, "If you see something in Torah that you KNOW to be wrong, there are two and only two alternatives. Either you are not reading the Torah properly -- or the Torah is wrong."

Notice that the third alternative, the one most commonly chosen by fundamentalists -- that is, "Discard your own rationality and moral sense in favor of religious dogmatism dictated by a literal reading" -- is not available to us. We are NOT allowed to stop thinking and just do as we're told. Not EVER. The Bible doesn't interpret itself, and even if it did, OUR MINDS STILL WORK. THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO.

As I've said elsewhere; a literal reading disfigures and denigrates the Bible. In the mouths of fundamentalists, it does that inadvertently; they make the book look stupid and wrong by using it to support stupid and wrong views. Atheists use literal readings to make the book look stupid and wrong too, only they do it on purpose: "Look at all these horrible massacres!" as if they really happened and must have been approved by God because they're so presented, never mind that Moses sometimes defied God's orders and Abraham even argued with him. These things aren't as simple as BOTH sides try to portray them. The Bible isn't a comic book; it's ancient literature, and it's DIFFERENT.

Either way: The meaning of Scripture doesn't lie on the surface, and we're still obligated to use our brains and remember that these documents are thousands of years old. It's not rational to dismiss them entirely, but it's even less rational to follow them without engaging a few brain cells -- not to mention some human compassion and empathy -- of our own.
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.


Closed Thread


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.

© 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