• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Ok... change my mind. It would be a relief.

Moderator's Warning:
Gentlemen.... remember where you are. Respectful discussion. Leave everybody's mama out of it.

I actually had a point to that statement- which was that he was arguing out of ingrained belief and what he was taught, rather than fact or scripture. No disrespect to his mama.
 
I actually had a point to that statement- which was that he was arguing out of ingrained belief and what he was taught, rather than fact or scripture. No disrespect to his mama.




Moderator's Warning:
Please do not respond to Mod instructions in-thread. This is against DP's rules, to avoid threads derailing into rules arguments.
 
And yet, I keep seeing threads telling me what Christians ought to believe about homosexuality, which seems to boil down to "ignore the Bible".... which is kind of contrary to the faith.
I wonder if those telling you what Christians out to believe on the topic are self-admitted Christians .. or not.

Regardless, I'm curious how this thread is going for you.

With so many posters stepping outside their religious texts and referencing their particularly selected historical references of the time to explain what their religious text meant, if you yourself do not consider valid those same historical reference materials or don't lean toward accepting the veracity of the posters' explanations in reference, how can they possibly convince you?

And, if you do accept the validity of their historical references outside the Bible and the veracity of their interpretations, if they've stepped outside the Bible in attempting to prove to you their point, did they not just violate your OP request to stay within the Bible alone?

References to historical texts outside the Bible are secular, and your OP requested that secular references be excluded.
 
I wonder if those telling you what Christians out to believe on the topic are self-admitted Christians .. or not.

Regardless, I'm curious how this thread is going for you.

With so many posters stepping outside their religious texts and referencing their particularly selected historical references of the time to explain what their religious text meant, if you yourself do not consider valid those same historical reference materials or don't lean toward accepting the veracity of the posters' explanations in reference, how can they possibly convince you?

And, if you do accept the validity of their historical references outside the Bible and the veracity of their interpretations, if they've stepped outside the Bible in attempting to prove to you their point, did they not just violate your OP request to stay within the Bible alone?


I am not adverse to using historical references regarding cultural norms or practices of the time, if they are relevant.

As for how the thread is going, it has been a mixed bag. There's been the usual nonsense ("well do you eat shellfish? wear mixed fibers in your clothes?") along with some interesting and well-thought-out dissertations on scriptural and cultural issues.

I am still reading and researching on many of the better replies... it has certainly deepened my understanding of certain issues and viewpoints already, so in that sense it has been worth the while.

Whether my mind is going to be changed or not remains to be seen. A couple of posters have raised doubts in my mind, and I am still collating data and considering how I will view what they have said.
 
I think it's valuable to consider the challenges of others to one's beliefs. If they're sound, they'll stand up and be strengthened.
 
Whether my mind is going to be changed or not remains to be seen. A couple of posters have raised doubts in my mind, and I am still collating data and considering how I will view what they have said.

I would trust the Word of God over the opinions of men on what's sinful, etc. But that's just me.
 
I would trust the Word of God over the opinions of men on what's sinful, etc. But that's just me.

I would too if we had something I thought was the true Word of God.
 
I would trust the Word of God over the opinions of men on what's sinful, etc. But that's just me.
The word of god has always been passed down through the languages of men. That's the only means of delivery and comes with the baggage of human opinions and subjectivity as a result.
 
The word of god has always been passed down through the languages of men. That's the only means of delivery and comes with the baggage of human opinions and subjectivity as a result.

Sorry, that doesn't work.

We have the Dead Sea Scrolls, including the 150 BC complete "Great Isaiah Scroll." With very little substantial differences from what we have today.
 
Sorry, that doesn't work.

We have the Dead Sea Scrolls, including the 150 BC complete "Great Isaiah Scroll." With very little substantial differences from what we have today.
I'm aware of this. That doesn't really account for the majority of my point.
 
The more you study the Bible the more you will find the Word of God.

Actually, the more I studied the Bible the more I hated myself and realized life was hopeless by believing the Bible is100% the word of God.
 
Actually, the more I studied the Bible the more I hated myself and realized life was hopeless by believing the Bible is100% the word of God.

I've read the whole thing many times and I realized the love and grace of Jesus Christ to pay for my sins at Calvary, and to afford me eternal love, joy, and peace in Heaven.
 
To be more precise, it isn't MY view on the matter that is in question, but NT verses mainly attributable to Paul and Timothy.

There is nothing in the bible attributable to Timothy, there are only letters written TO him, nothing written BY him. I thought you'd studied the bible for 5 decades?
 
I've yet to hear a sufficiently compelling argument to change my mind.... but I'm going to admit to you that if I did, it would be a RELIEF. I could say "yay gay" along with everyone else and stop drawing all the hate that flies in when I point out what the Bible says about it.

Now here's the catch.... it has to be Biblical, and theologically sound. This is about BIBLICAL truth and is a THEOLOGICAL question. Secular arguments will be disregarded. Psychology is not relevant. Biology is not relevant. Politics is not relevant.

It seems from the first quote you want to be able accept homosexuality, and it also seems you also feel that biologically, politically etc there is nothing wrong with homosexuality. I don't know enough at the bible to give any answers, but I would ask a question:

Why? Why do you so strongly feel that justification for your beliefs must be biblical and not grounded in reason and evidence? I would ask you to challenge your beliefs that the bible is of a higher authority than reason. That stance honestly baffles me.
 
Why? Why do you so strongly feel that justification for your beliefs must be biblical and not grounded in reason and evidence? I would ask you to challenge your beliefs that the bible is of a higher authority than reason. That stance honestly baffles me.

Doesn't reason tell you that if a being infinitely more wise than you wrote a book wherein he makes claims that don't make sense to you, those claims are likely to be right even if you can't make sense of them?

I'm not saying such a simplistic view of scripture is correct. I don't believe it is. But it is rational.
 
I've read the whole thing many times and I realized the love and grace of Jesus Christ to pay for my sins at Calvary, and to afford me eternal love, joy, and peace in Heaven.

I agree that Jesus Christ paid for our sins. However, that is leaving out all of the rule mongering people like to use the Bible to justify.
 
Doesn't reason tell you that if a being infinitely more wise than you wrote a book wherein he makes claims that don't make sense to you, those claims are likely to be right even if you can't make sense of them?

I'm not saying such a simplistic view of scripture is correct. I don't believe it is. But it is rational.

Reason tells me that if a being infinitely more wise than me wrote a book to tell me what is right or wrong then the book would be clear about what is right or wrong and I would be able to live my life following those rules. That didnt happen therefore an infinitely wise being didnt write such book.
 
Reason tells me that if a being infinitely more wise than me wrote a book to tell me what is right or wrong

Christians don't believe that*. Are you sure you know anything about the topic you've chosen to discuss?


*Technically, Christians do believe God wrote such a book, The Torah, but that it is no longer necessary for the place in history we now inhabit (the messianic age)
 
Christians don't believe that*. Are you sure you know anything about the topic you've chosen to discuss?


*Technically, Christians do believe God wrote such a book, The Torah, but that it is no longer necessary for the place in history we now inhabit (the messianic age)

I didnt say anything about Christians nor did the post I responded to. Are you sure your reading comprehension is up to the task of commenting on obtuse postings?
 
Slavery in the Bible was either

1. Voluntary
2. Punishment for sin against wicked individuals or nations
3. A sin committed by Jews and/or others.

Apart from that, what part of "Love your neighbor as yourself" do you think justifies enslaving your neighbor?

All of which are now culturally unacceptable because of knowledge we as the human race have attained. This is idneitical to the issue with homosexuality.

And "love thy neighbor" never stopped slavery in the past.
 
The MORAL LAW has never passed away from Old Testament times.

Adultery, thievery, idolatry, murder, and gay sex relations, etc., were sins then (in both the Old and New Testaments) and they're still sins today.

Gay sex relations outside of rape or pagan rituals were not sinful in the OT and are therefore not sinful today.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Notice the concept of the thread. Goshin is asking for information that confronts his current position on religion and homosexuality. Therefore, all comments NOT adhering to this... such as comments denigrating homosexuality will be met with infractions and thread bans. Also, this is not the thread to discuss whether Jesus is God or not. There are other threads for that. Stay on topic.
 
I don't have a personal hatred of gays or homosexuality.


I have a belief that the practice of it is sinful, because the Bible says so in many different scriptures.


I've heard people try to explain why those scriptures don't really mean what they say, or don't apply to modern homosexual relationships.


I've yet to hear a sufficiently compelling argument to change my mind.... but I'm going to admit to you that if I did, it would be a RELIEF. I could say "yay gay" along with everyone else and stop drawing all the hate that flies in when I point out what the Bible says about it.


So, here's a thread for it.... lay it out. Give me a compelling dissertation on why I should disregard what the Bible, OT and NT, says about homosexual activity being a sin.

Now here's the catch.... it has to be Biblical, and theologically sound. This is about BIBLICAL truth and is a THEOLOGICAL question. Secular arguments will be disregarded. Psychology is not relevant. Biology is not relevant. Politics is not relevant.

It has to be based in Scripture and theologically sound. For instance, if someone asks me why I don't obey the OT prohibition on eating pig or shellfish, I can point to Acts 10 and Acts 15 and say "that's why; as a modern Gentile Christian I am not subject to most OT law, because God and the authority of the Apostles collectively says so."

Scriptural and theologically sound; have at it.


I'll be genuinely interested if anyone can come up with such an assertion, that will withstand even the slightest scrutiny. If you don't know the Bible quite well, I'd recommend you not even try: this is the big leagues, if you don't know what you're talking about it will be quickly pointed out.




Bear in mind this is the Religious Discussion Forum, and the rules regarding respectful discussion and no religion-bashing apply.

Because if God is indeed the Creator of all that we know, including you, me and all of the untold billions of people that have walked this Earth with us and before us, then He would be creating sin himself by allowing homosexuals to come into existence. It is a paradox. One which cannot be doubled-down on and ignored, lest one wants to be looked at as not being logically sound. Gotta recognize the logic traps for what they are, man.

EDIT: To use scripture, look at Genesis 1:27 -- God created man in His image. The implications of that are profound when in tandem with homosexuality. Since God created man, and man is in His image, then homosexuality comes from God Himself.
 
Last edited:
Doesn't reason tell you that if a being infinitely more wise than you wrote a book wherein he makes claims that don't make sense to you, those claims are likely to be right even if you can't make sense of them?

I'm not saying such a simplistic view of scripture is correct. I don't believe it is. But it is rational.

Frankly, no.

Accepting that the book is an authority because the author is infinitely wise because it says so in the book is pretty much the definition of circular logic. There is no independent verification of Gods wisdom, and if the claims in there don't make sense then there doesn't seem to be any reason even in the book to call him wise.
 
Back
Top Bottom