If you need help you can team up with the dude who has been looking for the pro Trump posts of mine he said I did for over a year now. Quests like this give purpose to some people's lives, even if they never produce what is promised.

Not sure what to tell you, as you likely know the bible has a lot of really old, outdated language, so good luck following some of that in 2021 like the following:

No one whose testicles are crushed or whose male organ is cut off shall enter the assembly of the Lord.

Go in to your brother’s wife, and perform your duty as a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother

If two men, a man and his countryman, are struggling together, and the wife of one comes near to deliver her husband from the hand of the one who is striking him, and puts out her hand and seizes his genitals, then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.

Yet she increased her prostitution, remembering the days of her youth when she engaged in prostitution in the land of Egypt. She lusted after their genitals as large as those of donkeys, and their seminal emission was as strong as that of stallions.

Whoever utters the name of the Lord must be put to death. The whole community must stone him whether alien or native. If he utters the name, he must be put to death.


Just imagine what would be said about the internet (except for the donkey genitals part - internet likely supports that).

Bigots can be congenial, just as a racist can have a black friend.

I think it is pretty clear you fit the definition of a homophobe and bigot.

It's the age old problem, either God's moral prescriptions are arbitrary or he has sufficient reason for them. Except when we look for anything like reasons to think homosexuality might be immoral we get nowhere. Almost as if it is bigotry after all.

1. Except I wasn't merely being congenial; I genuinely had a wonderful time. It was one of the most delightful Thanksgiving celebrations for me ever.

2. I do not think that a racist would have a black friend. Maybe a business partner or a friendly acquaintance, but not a true friend.

I'm kewl with that, as long as it is clearly understood that I do not hate homosexuals, nor do I believe that they should be personally treated with less respect than heterosexuals.

Who is the we you are referring to? How hard have you looked for moral reasons against homosexuality? My guess is that you haven't looked very hard.

Not sure what you are trying to accomplish by listing a few random Old Covenant commandments that you present devoid of context, and which do not apply to anyone alive in 2021 anyway.

Is that bin Laden's pen name?

Please share an actual post of his so we can compare.

Thanks.

That actually is the point. Lots written in the Bible is way outdated and would not apply to anyone in 2021. Times change, which is why I asked if you would change your view if the church in general did on other topics. Seems you would not and would still adhere to ancient words, and I would then point out that it is convenient that you get to choose which ones still apply to everyone and which ones do not.

Anyway, I have no interest in actually posting in this forum, but I will check to get some closure on the mystical post told to me by that other poster in his alcoholic haze!

You can read the "we" as everyone.

There's a great many people who have sought out reasons to argue against the morality of homosexuality. I suppose we could go over them all again but you're not going to surprise anyone with anything new.

1. Everything written in the New Testament still applies today. No convenient cherry-picking required.

2. Old Testament law is typically divided into three categories: Moral, Ceremonial and Judicial. The ceremonial and judicial laws only applied to the Jews, while the moral laws are of a more "universal" nature (e.g. stealing is wrong whether you're a Jew or a Gentle).

alcoholic haze = d2_e4

I take it women aren't allowed to speak in your church then? Because the entirety of the post new covenant teaching re homosexuality (all ~3 verses of it) comes from Paul's writing, which also contains the text "Women should be silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as the law also says."

To be clear, there are very strong arguments that, analysed within context and with reference to the original Greek (among other considerations), this passage should not be taken literally and that it is not a sin for a woman to speak in church. The point is that there are a lot of very similar arguments regarding the few references to homosexuality as well, and if you are choosing to take the most literal view of these but don't do the same for other topics you are absolutely cherry-picking.

Lagtight,
Do you believe homosexuality is a choice? If not, do you still contend that people go against how they are biologically wired if they want to go to heaven?

Someone buries their mind in pre-medieval ideas, understanding, doctrine ... then supposes to philosophize about morality with a pathetic authoritarianism. Do the same for astronomy, physics, medicine, chemistry, etc. ... use the millennia old stuff. Why not? STFU already. Philosophy entails thinking for yourself about the nature of reality. Religion entails spieling the magic doctrines of superstitious peoples. You might as well when you go to the hospital funnel the treatment through the ideas of thousands of years ago. Why not? An omniscient god was informing them. You know like demons cause illness/mental illness. I believe, I believe, I believe. The real problem is believing you're evil for not believing. That's what traps people.

I believe that homosexual desire is not a choice, but that homosexual behavior is a choice.

Going to heaven is predicated on trusting in Jesus Christ for one's salvation. Nobody goes to Hell (merely) because of sexual sin. Practicing homosexuals and heterosexual fornicators are equally condemned by their sin, but anyone can enter Heaven by trusting in Christ alone for their salvation. In short, we are ALL condemned by our works, but saved by our faith in Christ.

If we're all condemned by our works then what role do works play in salvation? Presumably they have to count for something or morality ceases to matter. There's little point in coming down hard on practicing homosexuals if they're equally condemned by their acts as anyone else. They're just as capable of whatever sincere repentance is needed as any other sinners.

I was going to say something similar but if they're not actively trying to "improve" their behaviour I think they're not eligible. Like we're all sinners but the dedicated ones try to constantly improve themselves based on the word of God or something like that.
Kind of why Catholicism may be the goat Christian sect as you just have to confess and all is forgiven.

I don't think that solves the issue. If we're all sinners then a homosexual can say the exact same things as a heterosexual that "we're all sinners, but I'm trying to work on improvement". A homosexual is no more or less sinful than anyone else. And that's a position that I think Christians can take, and I'm sure plenty do, but some clearly have more animus towards LGBT folk than they do plain old heterosexuals. That difference in attitude can only be explained by bigotry.

I was going to ask LT if he would accept an openly gay couple to attend his church Sunday services every week because they're just sinners like all the rest of us. But I'm assuming since it's the behavior that is the sin and if this couple has no intention of trying to correct their sinning ways then they would be looked down upon.
Like there could be a serial adulterer in his congregation who is like "I can't wait for this sermon to end so I can go bang my mistress #2". That's probably not the kind of person they want participating in worship with them until he is ready to make an effort to change his ways.
I have the same perception as you that I think people see some sins to be worse than others. I mean murder is worse than lying, isn't it? I've known a few christians that really felt gays were the root cause of all that is wrong with society. It all started with gays and the devil worked his way from there to rot everything else. If we could just stop the gays we'd have a fighting chance!!

I think that when we say murder is worse than lying though you and I are going to point to a lot of obvious reasons to distinguish the two. That takes us back to the first problem I brought up, that it doesn't seem like there really is any reason to think that say some married monogamous homosexual could be doing anything wrong beyond violating the edict.

It's going to be hard to make the case that sins can be differentiated if it's true that we're all sinners and the fix for us all is the same "accept Jesus and try to do better". Anyone can do that regardless of how serious I might think the crime is.

Yeah but homosexuals aren't/shouldn't have to try to be better in regards to who they date. They're just being who God created.
I guess the hardcore Christians would say God is giving you a harder test or something.

Catholics distinguish between venial and mortal sins, where mortal sins are those that require a turning away from God and love, and venial sins are less serious sins that weaken our relationship with God and are an impediment to love, but not wholly inconsistent with them. Here's the Catechism:

Where do the homosexuals fall into?

Says the believer in the ancient holy land, so-called: "Oh, how cool. My god's bigotry and misogyny line up so well with my culture's. Praise his name!" 2000 years later ... same story. All you gotta do is believe and stuff like this, not to mentions streets of gold, are all yours.

Hi, Willd,

Your response above is worse than a "comparing apples to oranges" scenario; its more like a "comparing apples to nuclear submarines" scenario.

The "women being silent in church" passage is about church protocol, not a universal command like "thou shall shalt not steal." It is also a "one-off" point with at least two valid interpretations. Doctrine is never based on only one passage. And universal commands are pretty much always accompanied by a stated punishment. There is nothing in the passage about what should be done to these women who are out of control speaking in church when they're supposed to be quiet.

The prohibition against homosexual behavior is made clear in many passages in both Testaments..

Comparing apples to nuclear subs.

Thanks for sharing.

Well this is just a straight up lie. There are exactly three passages in the new testament that reference homosexuality at all and two of those are as part of a list of many sins (that was a common list also found in other contemporary sources, not just the Bible) without any specific focus on the topic. The other place it is talking about the dangers of idolatry and homosexuality is actually implied to be a consequence of idolatry rather than a root of sin itself.