U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Nebraska > Omaha
 [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 06-23-2011, 09:52 AM
 
2,665 posts, read 2,169,987 times
Reputation: 1471

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jessep28 View Post
The Law, in particular summarized by Ten Commandments.
So, what's the answer? Is showing a female ankle immoral? Is topless sunbathing immoral?

I don't see anything in my copy of the 10 commandments about clothing, perhaps my copy is defective?

 
Old 06-23-2011, 09:54 AM
 
1,072 posts, read 2,304,062 times
Reputation: 943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvinist View Post
I'm not aware of any Bible verse that talks about a woman's ankles being exposed.
Since you insist on using the Bible as the measure of morals, even though not everyone believes in the Bible, below are some quotes from the NIV Bible.

Leviticus 19:19 - Do not plant your fields with two kinds of seed. Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material.

Leviticus 19:27 - Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard.

Leviticus 11:7-8 - And the pig, though it has a divided hoof, does not chew the cud; it is unclean for you. You must not eat their meat or touch their carcasses; they are unclean for you.

Have you ever cut your hair or beard? Worn a cotton / polyester blend? Eaten a piece of bacon? If you answered yes to any of these questions, you have some serious 'splaining to do mister!
 
Old 06-23-2011, 10:01 AM
 
1,072 posts, read 2,304,062 times
Reputation: 943
Quote:
Originally Posted by jessep28 View Post
The Law, in particular summarized by Ten Commandments.
Oh good! That makes things much simpler than trying to focus on the entire Bible. What does the Ten Commandments specifically say about homosexuality? I looked it up and couldn't find anything, so I just want to make sure I'm not missing something.
 
Old 06-23-2011, 10:01 AM
 
6,486 posts, read 5,662,293 times
Reputation: 1272
Quote:
Originally Posted by marmom View Post
Since you insist on using the Bible as the measure of morals, even though not everyone believes in the Bible, below are some quotes from the NIV Bible.

Leviticus 19:19 - Do not plant your fields with two kinds of seed. Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material.

Leviticus 19:27 - Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard.

Leviticus 11:7-8 - And the pig, though it has a divided hoof, does not chew the cud; it is unclean for you. You must not eat their meat or touch their carcasses; they are unclean for you.

Have you ever cut your hair or beard? Worn a cotton / polyester blend? Eaten a piece of bacon? If you answered yes to any of these questions, you have some serious 'splaining to do mister!
Do you understand the context of those passages?

Those commands were given at a very specific time to a very specific group of people. God wanted his people (the Israelites) to to be separated from their neighbors. To do those things identified you as a pagan.

I'm not an ancient Israelite, and I'm not subject to those commands. The book of Hebrews says that Jesus was a priest in the order of Melchizedek. Melchizedek was a priest that lived prior to the Mosaic Law. As a Christian I follow the commands of Christ, who was the end of the Mosaic law.



Quote:
Originally Posted by DentalFloss View Post
So, what's the answer? Is showing a female ankle immoral? Is topless sunbathing immoral?

I don't see anything in my copy of the 10 commandments about clothing, perhaps my copy is defective?
If doing so causes someone to sin, then yes--it's immoral. If I can't look at a woman's ankle without sinning, then yes--it's immoral for a woman to intentionally wear that knowing that I am weak. But at some point she needs to live her life. She can't dress in a burka just to prevent me from possibly sinning.
 
Old 06-23-2011, 10:20 AM
 
1,072 posts, read 2,304,062 times
Reputation: 943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvinist View Post
Do you understand the context of those passages?

Those commands were given at a very specific time to a very specific group of people. God wanted his people (the Israelites) to to be separated from their neighbors. To do those things identified you as a pagan.

I'm not an ancient Israelite, and I'm not subject to those commands. The book of Hebrews says that Jesus was a priest in the order of Melchizedek. Melchizedek was a priest that lived prior to the Mosaic Law. As a Christian I follow the commands of Christ, who was the end of the Mosaic law.
Okay then, let's just focus on Christ's teachings. Please site a specific new testament passage where homosexuality is condemned by Christ.

I know the new testament talks about a man and a woman joining together, but where does it specifically condemn homosexuality? If you will use the argument of the Bible stating that a man and woman should join together, then does that mean it's immoral for a person to never marry? Do you honestly believe if Christ were sitting in front of a homosexual, that he would condemn them?
 
Old 06-23-2011, 10:27 AM
 
6,486 posts, read 5,662,293 times
Reputation: 1272
Quote:
Originally Posted by marmom View Post
Okay then, let's just focus on Christ's teachings. Please site a specific new testament passage where homosexuality is condemned by Christ.
To argue from silence is not a valid argument.

But Paul's writings in Romans and 1 Corinthians make it clear that it is.
Quote:
I know the new testament talks about a man and a woman joining together, but where does it specifically condemn homosexuality?

As noted, Romans 1, 1 Cor 6 are clear on it.
If you will use the argument of the Bible stating that a man and woman should join together, then does that mean it's immoral for a person to never marry? Do you honestly believe if Christ were sitting in front of a homosexual, that he would condemn them?
Why would Christ not condemn a sinner? Did he tell the woman at the well to continue in her adultery? Or the woman he saved from being stoned? He told them to sin no more.
 
Old 06-23-2011, 10:29 AM
 
2,665 posts, read 2,169,987 times
Reputation: 1471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvinist View Post
God wanted his people (the Israelites) to to be separated from their neighbors.
Ahhhh, so god is a racist? Israelite good, not Israelite bad? Well, he did endorse slavery, so I guess he must be.

Quote:
I'm not an ancient Israelite, and I'm not subject to those commands.
Does that mean the whole homosexuality is an abomination thing is also cancelled?

Quote:
As a Christian I follow the commands of Christ, who was the end of the Mosaic law.
Dang, cherry picking again!

Matthew 5:17: Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

So, which is it? The end or not the end? I'm so confused.

Quote:
If I can't look at a woman's ankle without sinning, then yes--it's immoral for a woman to intentionally wear that knowing that I am weak.
If you can't look at a woman's ankle (or, for that matter, any part of her) without sinning (whatever that means), I'd suggest the problem is yours, not hers. And you still haven't answered the question.
 
Old 06-23-2011, 10:31 AM
 
2,665 posts, read 2,169,987 times
Reputation: 1471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvinist View Post
But Paul's writings in Romans and 1 Corinthians make it clear that it is.
And who was Paul? How did he come to know such things? Do you suppose he was just making it up as he went?
 
Old 06-23-2011, 10:42 AM
 
Location: Nebraska
4,179 posts, read 9,373,871 times
Reputation: 9546
"God says" is not the question. Even "All gays are going to HELL" is not the question. The question is, "Does it violate the rights of individuals subject to a Constitutional government to specify that some members of a minority or a majority do not have equal rights under that Constitution?"

I totally support any church that says, "We don't want gays here, we won't marry gays in our religion, we think gays are going to hell" - they are well within their rights to say and practice that belief, just as gay folk have the right to refuse to attend any such church, pay tithes to it, or support it in any way. No one is going to believe the same way as everyone else, and that's fine - as long as you don't use those beliefs to invade any one else's rights.

However, I refuse to support any government that uses force, either physical force or fiscal force, to deny any individual, consenting adult the right to share his/her life, legal benefits, outcomes, or responsibilities with whichever consenting adult s/he chooses. I further find it abhorrent that any government representative elected to serve the people under Constitutional law would use his or his constituents' religious or any other beliefs to restrict the rights of other individuals - constituent or not.

OK, say all GLBT are going to hell. Pure and simple, not even worth discussing, they just ARE. So what? It is no government's business to use the legal system of individual rights to restrict the rights of ANY group, minority or majority, based on any religious treatise or text, or even a massive, deeply-held belief that "those people" don't "deserve" the same rights as others. The ONLY thing a constitutional government has the RIGHT to do - as permitted by the people - is to ensure that individuals' rights are protected and maintained. Nothing more.

In a purely equal, Constitutionally-based society, ALL legal citizens would have completely equal rights under the law; without favoritism, without even discussion. Unfortunately, everyone from the religionists to the Euro-Asian-Muslim-Illegal-African-Baptist-Catholic-American minority seems to think that laws and government are nothing but big sticks to be stolen from each other, to be used to bash each other over the heads. These kind of Neanderthal, emotional and purposefully-divisive debates would be simple to solve - if we just referred them to the Constitution as the only guide for law and legality. Believe whatever you choose, it's your right - but DON'T use law to ram your beliefs down other peoples' throats, and tell them how to run their lives, what they can or cannot do, as long as they don't take away any one else's rights to do the same.
 
Old 06-23-2011, 10:43 AM
 
1,072 posts, read 2,304,062 times
Reputation: 943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvinist View Post
To argue from silence is not a valid argument.
Again, your opinion.

The Biblical arguments simply do not add up or make sense. So only some of the old testament is over-ridden by Christ? Where does Christ specifically say that now it is okay to wear blended fabrics, eat pork, and cut your hair and beard? Because as you said, to argue from silence is not a valid argument.
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


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

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 > U.S. Forums > Nebraska > Omaha
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - 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 - Top