|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 01/03/2014 : 18:40:52 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Convinced
No. I am for personal liberty in our society. I don’t want government to ban same sex marriage or racist talk but I do advocate against those ideas. | How can you advocate against a private agreement between two people (like same-sex marriage) that doesn't affect you and still claim to be in favor of personal liberty?What are the clear passages about homosexuality? | “Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable.” (Lev 18:22) and “Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.” (Ro 1:26-27)
Just to be clear these are included in larger passages about right sexual behavior and other sins. God does not see us as homosexuals or heterosexuals but people that commit homosexual or heterosexual sin.0 and this is how we Christians needs to see people. | So is everything that is "detestable" or "shameful" a sin? Are they synonyms? Proverbs 6:16-19 only lists seven things "detestable" to God, and nothing in Lev 18 is in there. Do you try to follow all of the old Levitical law yourself? Lev 18:26-29 instructs followers to punish non-Jews who break those sex laws.
And Romans 1:18-27 indicates that homosexual acts and other "depraved" behaviors were the punishment God meted out for worshiping false idols and denying God's glory. Those passages are saying that homsexuality is a punishment for sin, not itself a sin.
In other words, I don't think those passages are as clear as you think they are.Correct. That does not make sense. We know God exists and that we do wrong but we cannot know who God is or how to have those sins forgiven without someone telling them. | It still seems to me to be putting weird limitations on God's power to forgive. Are Adam and Eve in hell? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail) Evidently, I rock! Why not question something for a change? Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 01/03/2014 : 18:51:19 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Convinced
If i remember right he was talking about his expierience as a child. That was what he remembered thinking. He never said they were better off back then just that his observation was that they were happy. | So you're telling me that when Phil Robertson said this:I never, with my eyes, saw the mistreatment of any black person. Not once. Where we lived was all farmers. The blacks worked for the farmers. I hoed cotton with them. I’m with the blacks, because we’re white trash. We’re going across the field…. They’re singing and happy. I never heard one of them, one black person, say, ‘I tell you what: These doggone white people’ — not a word!… Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues. ...he intended his words to be about only his own experience, and he didn't mean for anyone to generalize his statement in any way (least of all himself)? I think you're being far too generous. He's answering a question about whether "black people" were happy. How likely is it that the questioner asked specifically about only the black people Robertson worked with? It sure reads like a defense of institutionalized racism to me. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail) Evidently, I rock! Why not question something for a change? Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
Convinced
Skeptic Friend
USA
384 Posts |
Posted - 01/06/2014 : 14:05:09 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
How can you advocate against a private agreement between two people (like same-sex marriage) that doesn't affect you and still claim to be in favor of personal liberty? | I don't want anyone to force them to stop or do anything but I can still have the opinion it is wrong. I don't feel like my personal liberty is affected in any way because you think I am wrong in using it to give an opinion against homosexuality.
So is everything that is "detestable" or "shameful" a sin? Are they synonyms? Proverbs 6:16-19 only lists seven things "detestable" to God, and nothing in Lev 18 is in there. Do you try to follow all of the old Levitical law yourself? Lev 18:26-29 instructs followers to punish non-Jews who break those sex laws. | No, I am not required to follow these laws.
And Romans 1:18-27 indicates that homosexual acts and other "depraved" behaviors were the punishment God meted out for worshiping false idols and denying God's glory. Those passages are saying that homsexuality is a punishment for sin, not itself a sin. | God gave them over to do what not ought to be done. (Ro 1:28) in verse 30 it gives a list of other things we should not do.
It still seems to me to be putting weird limitations on God's power to forgive. Are Adam and Eve in hell?
| He seems to place the limitations on himself. I have no beef with God if he chooses to forgive someone by any means, but the Bible says there is one way to be forgiven and thats how He seems to want to do it.
I don't know if Adam and Eve are in hell or not. |
Therefore be careful how you walk, not as unwise men but as wise, making the most of your time, because the days are evil. So then do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is. (Eph 5:15-17) |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 01/09/2014 : 11:18:46 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Convinced
I don't want anyone to force them to stop or do anything but I can still have the opinion it is wrong. I don't feel like my personal liberty is affected in any way because you think I am wrong in using it to give an opinion against homosexuality. | But again, "advocacy" isn't a synonym for "having an opinion." I think chocolate is the best ice-cream flavor, but I don't advocate on its behalf nor do I advocate against, say, strawberry. Advocacy against same-sex marriage isn't simply your opinion that you think it's wrong, it's actively trying to convince others that it's wrong.
And someone who is in favor of personal liberty would think that what goes on between consenting adults is none of their business, and so their judgement of those acts doesn't matter. You can't insist simultaneously that your opinion doesn't matter and that your opinion is important enough to try to spread. You can't be a pro-personal-liberty advocate against same-sex marriage. Not without being a hypocrite.No, I am not required to follow these laws. | So why should anyone care about Lev 18:22? If you're not required to follow the law ("Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman...") then how is someone else who fails to follow the law a sinner or otherwise in the wrong? Again: the Bible is as clear as mud.
And also (since you didn't answer before): is everything "shameful" or "detestable" a sin? Are "shameful" and "destestable" always synonyms for "sin?"God gave them over to do what not ought to be done. | But why shouldn't they be done? You don't have to follow the law.in verse 30 it gives a list of other things we should not do. | (Again, it gives a list of behaviors that God forced people to engage in as a punishment for their failure to acknowledge his tyrannical, egocentric butt.) Is "sin" a synonym for "something someone ought not to do?" People sholdn't go swimming when the conditions make riptide likely, but is it a sin to do so? What, specifically, is a sin?He seems to place the limitations on himself. I have no beef with God if he chooses to forgive someone by any means, but the Bible says there is one way to be forgiven and thats how He seems to want to do it. | The Bible also says that there were once grasshopperss with only four legs. It's not an accurate reference.
But there are other methods of forgiveness in the Bible. Leviticus 19:20-22“‘If a man sleeps with a female slave who is promised to another man but who has not been ransomed or given her freedom, there must be due punishment. Yet they are not to be put to death, because she had not been freed. The man, however, must bring a ram to the entrance to the tent of meeting for a guilt offering to the Lord. With the ram of the guilt offering the priest is to make atonement for him before the Lord for the sin he has committed, and his sin will be forgiven. Rather specific, but there you go.I don't know if Adam and Eve are in hell or not. | Why not? The Bible doesn't mention any sort of reconciliation, does it? In fact, if the Bible is right, women are still suffering from the punishment for their transgression. One would think that if God forgave them, he'd lift the curses, too. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail) Evidently, I rock! Why not question something for a change? Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 01/16/2014 : 01:06:35 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
One would think that if God forgave them, he'd lift the curses, too.
|
Never presume to know the mind of God. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 01/16/2014 : 03:09:34 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
Never presume to know the mind of God. | And that's why the Bible should be ignored. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail) Evidently, I rock! Why not question something for a change? Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 01/19/2014 : 00:32:07 [Permalink]
|
But there's a caveat. Never presume to know the mind of God unless he tells you what he's thinking.
I mean if he tells you straight up "Bro, this is what's going through my head right now". Then yeah it's ok to presume to know the mind of God in that situation. |
|
Edited by - On fire for Christ on 01/19/2014 03:14:35 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 01/22/2014 : 23:29:06 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
I mean if he tells you straight up "Bro, this is what's going through my head right now". Then yeah it's ok to presume to know the mind of God in that situation. | By the way, it seems like the last time "right now" was an appropriate descriptor of god's activities was almost 2,000 years ago. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail) Evidently, I rock! Why not question something for a change? Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
Convinced
Skeptic Friend
USA
384 Posts |
Posted - 02/17/2014 : 12:28:55 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
But again, "advocacy" isn't a synonym for "having an opinion." I think chocolate is the best ice-cream flavor, but I don't advocate on its behalf nor do I advocate against, say, strawberry. Advocacy against same-sex marriage isn't simply your opinion that you think it's wrong, it's actively trying to convince others that it's wrong. | Whatever you want to call it is fine. I don’t try to change laws or protest, but I will give my reasons for believing the way I do if I get into a conversation. I don’t want laws restricting homosexual behavior or marriage; I think convincing people of the gospel is the way to go.
And someone who is in favor of personal liberty would think that what goes on between consenting adults is none of their business, and so their judgement of those acts doesn't matter. You can't insist simultaneously that your opinion doesn't matter and that your opinion is important enough to try to spread. You can't be a pro-personal-liberty advocate against same-sex marriage. Not without being a hypocrite. | I am not advocating restricting their freedom to do what they want but I am not going to say I agree with it.
So why should anyone care about Lev 18:22? If you're not required to follow the law ("Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman...") then how is someone else who fails to follow the law a sinner or otherwise in the wrong? Again: the Bible is as clear as mud. | The law is no longer binding on Christians, we are free from the judgment of violating it. However, all people sin, saved or not, but Christians will increasingly sin less and be repentant when they do. The sin of homosexuality is restated in the New Testament as well and is a violation of Gods laws.
And also (since you didn't answer before): is everything "shameful" or "detestable" a sin? Are "shameful" and "destestable" always synonyms for "sin?" | I would say generally yes, but the definition of sin is violating gods laws, so if shameful or detestable things violate gods laws then yes they are sinful.
But why shouldn't they be done? You don't have to follow the law. | Romans chapters 5-7 explains this.
(Again, it gives a list of behaviors that God forced people to engage in as a punishment for their failure to acknowledge his tyrannical, egocentric butt.) Is "sin" a synonym for "something someone ought not to do?" People sholdn't go swimming when the conditions make riptide likely, but is it a sin to do so? What, specifically, is a sin? | Sin is transgression of Gods laws.
The Bible also says that there were once grasshopperss with only four legs. It's not an accurate reference. | You can google many responses to this and some are better than others, but I would assume you would reject every one of them. In the end you don’t have to believe the bible is without errors to be a Christian. I disagree with Christians I know that believe evolution or don’t believe the flood story or that a donkey talked but they are still my brothers and sisters in Christ. If you want to “deconvert” people then you need to prove the gospel message is incorrect in some way, that Jesus did not die on the cross or he never existed or something like that.
But there are other methods of forgiveness in the Bible. Leviticus 19:20-22 “‘If a man sleeps with a female slave who is promised to another man but who has not been ransomed or given her freedom, there must be due punishment. Yet they are not to be put to death, because she had not been freed. The man, however, must bring a ram to the entrance to the tent of meeting for a guilt offering to the Lord. With the ram of the guilt offering the priest is to make atonement for him before the Lord for the sin he has committed, and his sin will be forgiven. Rather specific, but there you go. | Jesus is our sacrifice, He is the spotless lamb that forgives our sin. No other way is possible. Then and now. Many verses in the bible say that everyone is saved by grace through faith in Jesus. (Lk 24:25-47, Acts 3:18-24, Romans 4:1-16)
Why not? The Bible doesn't mention any sort of reconciliation, does it? In fact, if the Bible is right, women are still suffering from the punishment for their transgression. One would think that if God forgave them, he'd lift the curses, too. | Why would you assume that? Saved Christians today have to deal with the consequences of sin. Can you show me a passage where is says either way? I can’t. So, I cannot answer the question. |
Therefore be careful how you walk, not as unwise men but as wise, making the most of your time, because the days are evil. So then do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is. (Eph 5:15-17) |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 02/24/2014 : 11:10:00 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Convinced
I am not advocating restricting their freedom to do what they want but I am not going to say I agree with it. | I don't know that anyone is asking you to say you agree with it.The law is no longer binding on Christians, we are free from the judgment of violating it. However, all people sin, saved or not, but Christians will increasingly sin less and be repentant when they do. The sin of homosexuality is restated in the New Testament as well and is a violation of Gods laws. | But so what? You're free from judgment. You can sin with impunity. Why be repentant? It doesn't make sense.I would say generally yes, but the definition of sin is violating gods laws, so if shameful or detestable things violate gods laws then yes they are sinful. | Which laws? The old 613 commandments, the new two, or all 615?But why shouldn't they be done? You don't have to follow the law. | Romans chapters 5-7 explains this. | I suppose those chapters "explain" something if you can overlook the Orwellian bafflegab. It reads like Paul is simply trying to rationalize his own bad behavior as somehow ultimately being good.
I do like how Paul compares Jesus to Adam, though, in terms of the universality of their acts. Jesus' death unbound all people from the law, not just Christians, just like Adam's disobedience condemned all people (not just those who had faith in Adam). Thanks, Paul!If you want to “deconvert” people then you need to prove the gospel message is incorrect in some way, that Jesus did not die on the cross or he never existed or something like that. | People existed back then. Lots of them. People died on the cross back then. Lots of them. The central basis of Christianity is neither of those things: it's that Jesus died and came back to life. How could that possibly be disproven other than to point out that it depends on magic - magic that is attested to in no other place than the Bible? There is no independent, verifiable evidence on which to base belief in Jesus as Savior, it necessarily comes down to faith. And reasoning people out of something they didn't reason themselves into is something that seldom works. You need to do that for yourself.But there are other methods of forgiveness in the Bible. Leviticus 19:20-22 “‘If a man sleeps with a female slave who is promised to another man but who has not been ransomed or given her freedom, there must be due punishment. Yet they are not to be put to death, because she had not been freed. The man, however, must bring a ram to the entrance to the tent of meeting for a guilt offering to the Lord. With the ram of the guilt offering the priest is to make atonement for him before the Lord for the sin he has committed, and his sin will be forgiven. Rather specific, but there you go. | Jesus is our sacrifice, He is the spotless lamb that forgives our sin. No other way is possible. Then and now. Many verses in the bible say that everyone is saved by grace through faith in Jesus. (Lk 24:25-47, Acts 3:18-24, Romans 4:1-16) | You may believe that, but you have failed to address Leviticus 19:20-22 directly. Lk 24:25-47 doesn't say anything about how individuals are forgiven. Acts 3:18-24 doesn't say that Leviticus is wrong (it doesn't claim that faith is the only way to be forgiven).
Romans 4:14 does directly contradict that guilt offering as a method of forgiveness (and all the other commandments, too). But 14-16 also provide an interesting contrast to Romans 5-7. Paul certainly seemed very conflicted about sin and the utility of the law.One would think that if God forgave them, he'd lift the curses, too. | Why would you assume that? | Because that's what "forgive" means? You don't forgive someone for something and then keep punishing them for it.
Also, because god said he wouldn't punish children for the offenses of their parents. Of course, the fact that god cursed all of humankind forever for Adam and Eve's alleged transgression puts the lie to that claim.Saved Christians today have to deal with the consequences of sin. | We're talking about one particular sin event, not sin in general.Can you show me a passage where is says either way? I can’t. So, I cannot answer the question. | Sort of important, though, isn't it? If god isn't consistent in applying the faith standard, then you don't have grounds to expect his promise to you to be fulfilled. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail) Evidently, I rock! Why not question something for a change? Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
ThorGoLucky
Snuggle Wolf
USA
1487 Posts |
Posted - 02/24/2014 : 13:18:47 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
If you want to “deconvert” people then you need to prove the gospel message is incorrect in some way, that Jesus did not die on the cross or he never existed or something like that. | People existed back then. Lots of them. People died on the cross back then. Lots of them. The central basis of Christianity is neither of those things: it's that Jesus died and came back to life. How could that possibly be disproven other than to point out that it depends on magic - magic that is attested to in no other place than the Bible? There is no independent, verifiable evidence on which to base belief in Jesus as Savior, it necessarily comes down to faith. And reasoning people out of something they didn't reason themselves into is something that seldom works. You need to do that for yourself. |
People can quickly be unreasoned into something emotionally, but they can be reasoned out of it, though usually slowly. It's basically about realizing that faith is pretending to know what you don't know. See A Manual for Creating Atheists by Peter Boghossian. |
|
|
|
|
|
|