Can someone address this PLEASE?

Thats 3 consecutive posts by dlowan!

I'm blowing the whistle and calling foul. (edit...I can't believe I actually spelled it "fowl"! d'oh!)

Penalty: Forced use of the "edit" button next time. Ok, you may now proceed with the debate.

dlowan is clearly a rabbit and not a fowl. I include this link for everyone's amusement.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0069005/

Foxfyre, I don't know where you got the idea that the ancients did not recognize homosexuality:

Romans 1
24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator--who is forever praised. Amen.
26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

Leviticus 18
22 " 'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.

Leviticus 20
13 " 'If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

Deuteronomy 23
17 No Israelite man or woman is to become a shrine prostitute. 18 You must not bring the earnings of a female prostitute or of a male prostitute into the house of the LORD your God to pay any vow, because the LORD your God detests them both.

Terry, don't try to answer this with Biblical passages. That form of argument (at least for this thread) has been discounted. We don't want circular arguments. We want original opinions.

How did I get here?
I just stumbled on to this site. I can't even remember how.

I have a hard time believing that foxfyre is spending countless hours on research and drafting for a to-be-published work and cannot substantiate one of her claims with proof or a decent example. Therefore, my best guess is that foxfyre is lying about her expertise and Craven de Kere is wasting his time on such a turkey-shoot.

I am writing a book on how the Bible actually says nothing on the issue of God. The premise is that ancient Hebrews simply did not have any conception of God and did not even consider the existence of God. OT references forthcoming. :wink:

You know, I just want to be content and happy, and I live in the 21st century. I didn't know I had to be study ancient Hebrew to gain the moral standards and life instruction apparently supplied by the Creator of All Things. That's quite a high-standard for a kid like me.

Re: Can someone address this PLEASE?


I will try to answer this.

The Bible is not one book. It is a compilation of books (about 66) written by (about 44) authors over a time period of a few thousand years. If you look in the contents you will find the authors names (not a one of them is God). It is hard to say in exact numbers because there are many different versions of the Bible. Because of the way it was written and the time it took, there are many contradictions of law, doctrine, and facts.

Many religious organizations understand this and don't try to push "The Bible is God's Word." Instead they say the Bible contains God's word which to me is more logical. Fundamentalists believe the Bible is God. With every word of it sacred. If you took the Bible away from those preachers they would be silent, not realizing God exists outside the Bible as well as inside. None of what I say should be used to belittle religion as a whole or individually. Everything in this world is appropriate and necessary for us to learn real spiritual growth.

Now, what about Christianity? If you profess to be a Christian it would mean to me that you are a follower of Jesus. This would mean that you would do as Jesus asked His followers to do. "Love one another." "Judge not, lest ye be judged." You would be kind and helpful to all with no condemnation of "gays" or any other minority group. Incidentally I am not gay nor Christian, I belong to no organized religion.

Your relationship with God is a personal one, founded and continued by you only. God loves you very much, try to love one another.

Love

I think you did an excellent job. And a warm welcome to A2K.

The post by "a light" above is Christian doctrine at it's best. While it serves the needs of Christians it is not a universal forum. It is exclusive in that some people never heard of it, and others will never understand it. The description of love is pale, and weak, also exclusive. Real love is all inclusive.

While I don't think being gay is normal, I don't think anyone will go to hell either.

After I had a NDE I would explain what I saw and felt to the Christians. They told me I was in league with the devil because what I saw wasn't in the Bible. After taking a lot of flak I finally wrote a small paper about the Christian doctrine and what love was really about. I am leaving a link to it below because it is relevant to this discussion. Just replace the words NDE with gay, new age, atheistism, paganism, wiccan, or any other religion that is not Christian. It ends with a true Bible definition of love, love that most Christians will never understand or practice.

EDIT (MODERATOR): Link Removed

Love

First, I would like to apologize as a Christian on behalf of those Christians who have belittled you or condemned you for your beliefs, and I would ask you for your forgiveness, Lekatt. As you so eloquently quoted in your paper, "If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal" (1 Corinthians 13:1). Know that I am writing this in genuine love, and I ask that you would read what I write with an open heart.

I would also like to thank you for your response. I found your article to be challenging, and I offer to you a couple ideas that you might find of interest, and could provide some possible answers to your questions. I hope you don't mind, but I am going to copy and paste some of the statements you made in your paper, so that everyone may know where I am coming from.

Again, I do not claim to be an expert by any means, and these are merely my personal thoughts and beliefs concerning the issues raised.

Topic #1: Saved by Faith

Italics denote quotes from Lekatt's Paper

The Bible has thousands of verses. These verses were written down hundreds, even thousands of years apart. The first written have nothing to do with the last. But, as is well known, manipulators of the verse can take a few sentences here, and a few there, adding or changing the meaning of a word or two and produce a new church doctrine that is said to be Biblical. Everyone will then be expected to conform to it. The so-called "plan of salvation." I believe is one of these manufactured doctrines.

The doctrine goes: "Jesus was sacrificed for the sins of the world, and who ever believes this and accepts Jesus as their personal saviour will be saved. They will not die, but live eternally in Heaven." Once Jesus is accepted the saved will be saved forever. "Once saved, always saved." However, those that reject Jesus will be thrown into hell to burn, scream, be tortured, feel intense pain for eternity. Now that's what I call negative incentive.

Being saved is an act of faith, not works, you don't have to do anything. It is like a loyalty oath, a pledge of allegiance, a declaration of intent. The sad part is no mention of following the teachings of Jesus. I can understand why this doctrine came about. It is much, much easier to pledge your faith than it is to work at compassion, loving yourself and others. To grow spiritually by returning good, and forgiving those that despitefully use you. To not judge others, to heal the sick, feed the hungry, etc,

I believe being saved comes to us through the grace of God, a gift to humanity, and faith "is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see" (Hebrews 11:1). Faith is our trust in the promise that God has secured our salvation through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. It is through faith that we have security that we are saved.

However, true faith produces works. The careful distinction that must be made is that one is not saved by the works they do, but that the works that they do are a sign of their faith. Can someone do works and not have faith? Absolutely. Only God knows for certain where someone's heart is, and He will be the one to judge the content of our hearts when the time comes. For a much better explanation of the flowing of works from faith, please check out James 2:14-26.

I hope that provides some help with the concern that faith is the easy way out. If not, I would appreciate knowing what other concerns you have on the subject.

Topic #2: Jesus Sacrifice for Sin

There is no verse in the Bible that clearly states the salvation doctrine. John 3:16 says nothing about a "sacrifice for sins." Many of the other verses used to prove this doctrine do not either. There is verse about Jesus died for us, but mention nothing about sacrifice for sin. If this is the "heart" of Christianity wouldn't it be clearly stated many times. Why does one need to read a verse here, and another there, plus do some interpretation of words to come up with it.

My friend, I offer a few Bible verses for you to check out. I know I may be falling into the trap of picking and choosing verses, but these all come from the same book of the Bible and I believe they are all trying to point in this same direction.

From Hebrews (I encourage everyone to read prayerfully through this entire book if possible):

Chapter 7: Verse 27

"Unlike the other high priests, he (Jesus) does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself."

Chapter 9: Verses 12-15

"He (Jesus) did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption. The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean. How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death (i.e. sin), so that we may serve the living God! For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance--that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant."

Chapter 9: Verses 27-28

"Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him."

Chapter 10: Verses 8-10

"First he (Jesus) said, 'Sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings you (God) did not desire, nor were you pleased with them' although the law required them to be made. Then he said, 'Here I am, I have come to do your will.' He sets aside the first to establish the second. And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all."

Chapter 10: Verse 13

"Since that time he (Jesus) waits for his enemies to be made his footstool, because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy."

I hope that you can see that the concept of Jesus' sacrifice for sins has a scriptural basis. I believe these preceding verses point precisely to this idea and that no interpretation is needed.

Point #3: A Brief Thought on Condemnation

I truly have not given a lot of thought to this subject, so my answer here may be very unsatisfactory, but I shall give a brief thought anyway in hope that it might make some sense.

Again from Hebrews:

Chapter 10: Verses 26-27

"If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth (that Jesus sacrificed himself for the forgiveness of sins), no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God."

This does not answer the question as to what happens to those who have never heard the Good News, but it does provide an answer for those who have heard the Word of God, understood it, and rejected it. I believe God has given humanity the ability to turn from His love, just as we are able to turn from the loving hand of our fellow man. Why this is so is a question only God himself can answer.

I hope this is helpful, both personally to you, Lekatt, and all others who happen to come across this post. Peace be with you and God bless.

Remember, "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever" (Hebrews 13:8).

You have done as I said, picked verses here and there to prove what you want to prove. You did not address the main points of my argument.

I can choose verses also like:

One verse in the bible will show this as fact. King James version John 20:17 Jesus saith unto her. Touch me not; but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my father and your Father and to my God and your God. Now Jesus tells us his God is our God.

From John 14, Jesus said:
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. Don't see many Christians walking on water.

Luke 17:20: Jesus said:

The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

Only in your heart will you find love and peace.

From John 8, Jesus says:
Ye judge after the flesh; I judge no man.

Matthew 7:1: Jesus said:

Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

Well the trading of verses can go on and on and prove nothing. Anything we take out of context is meaningless, and the Bible is full of contradictions. If you don't believe that go to:

http://ffrf.org/lfif/?t=contra.txt

What disturbs me most about Christianity is their doctrine of "if you don't believe as we say you will go to hell." This is not true and can not be honestly found in the Bible.

However, I think you are a good person, kind and loving, and it is that attitude that will get you into your heaven.

Jesus said love one another and that is what it takes. So I won't trade verses with you anymore for reasons stated above, and I hope you don't go around telling people they are lost and going to hell. Deal?

Love

I apologize for not replying sooner. This past week has been absolutely crazy for me. Anyway…

Please forgive me for not addressing your main points, Lekatt. I must have misinterpreted your message. I took your main points to be that 1. being saved by faith is too easy, 2. there is no verse in the bible that clearly states the salvation doctrine, and 3. there is no biblical support for the doctrine of damnation upon true rejection (rejection after having been presented and understanding the Good News) of Christianity.

I would be honored if you would tell me straight forward what your main points are, bulleted if possible for clarity sake, so that I may have a better understanding of your problems/questions.

I will also admit that I did pick verses, but only for the mere sake that they pointed directly to the issue of salvation doctrine. You asked for specific verses pointing to the sacrifice for sins, and that is what I offered. Also, all of those verses on that topic came from the same book, Hebrews. I did not jump around to various passages from different books. I believe if one read through all of Hebrews openly and carefully, they would see that the verses I chose connect together and are not independent of one another. I believe the message of salvation that I pointed to exists throughout the entire book.

I checked out your link, concerning contradictions in the Bible, and the list is quite long. For the sake of this discussion, keeping it within a certain degree of brevity so that true learning can continue, I would be more than happy to try to address some of the specific contradictions listed on that site, but I do not have the time to try and address them all and still maintain my life.

You also said "What disturbs me most about Christianity is their doctrine of 'if you don't believe as we say you will go to hell.' This is not true and cannot be honestly found in the Bible." I would point you to my last posting regarding Hebrews 10: 26-27. I do not believe that someone is condemned for not wanting to take communion, or refusing to attend a specific church service, or most of the other differences that divide the Christian denominations. However, once exposed to and understanding the truth, which is the saving power of Jesus Christ, I believe the ultimate choice that we make (we may flip-flop during our life, but it's our final answer that counts) will affect us for eternity.

I promise I won't go around telling people they are going to hell, but I won't stop telling people about the awesome possibility of eternal salvation through Jesus Christ.

It is your Christian doctrine that condemns and judges, not God.
God has no religion and wrote no books. People write books and say "this is the work of God." Then they interpret the books for their own benefit, and/or the benefit of the organization they follow.

I know I can not explain it to you, something you have to learn for yourself.

http://www.aleroy.com/jesus00.htm


My main points are:

God is Love.

To be like God is the goal.

Jesus taught how to be like God.

Everything else is superficial.

Love

I'm glad you mentioned the Greeks and Persians, dlowan, because I have come to think that homophobia in the West is rather learned, and think it is largely by way of Judeo-Christian paradigms that it has disseminated. One thing I am unclear of is the pagan, pre-Judeo-Christian Germanic/ Northern European attitude about homosexuality.

Anyway, Foxyfire, the evidence indicates that the ancient Jews did know and were familiar with homosexuality as it occurs throughout whole societies and civilizations as it does within individual human beings.

Also, I think you could have avoided twelve pages of roundabout discussion by simply stating that, and this is how I interpret your approach to the Bible, the Bible is largely metaphorical, an Augustinian approach by and large, and you believe the homophobia in the Bible is largely metaphorical. Right?

Hi Lekatt,

Thanks for the bullet points about your main beliefs. I think it helps me to understand what you're thinking a little more clearly. If you don't mind my asking, do you believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God?

In Love

LeKatt


Liked that part.

Infrablue writes:


It isn't all that simple. Much of the imagery and many of the stories in the Bible are metaphorical, mythical, and/or symoblic yes, but not all. Some of the Bible is pure history supported by non-Biblical sources, some of it is theological statement, and some of it is illustrative of the culture and beliefs of the people who wrote it. (Aside for the Christians: I am leaving out any references to belief in divine inspiration here as most on this thread are nonChristians.)

The manuscripts were very sloppily edited together into what we call the Bible today and as a result it does require a good deal of reference to nonBiblical sources to know the more probable chronological order, meaning of historical references, and intent.
(Note to those who believe I am speaking pure hogwash here, that's okay. I usually think you do too. )

As far as my opinions of homosexual references in the Bible for which I have been much maligned in this thread, I will stand on the information that I have. There are a number of references to homosexual activity in both the Old and New Testaments and yes, these references are usually unflattering and/or disapproving. But in every case, they refer to group activity and/or a cultural phenomenon. In no case do you find any reference or even a suggestion of a same sex relationship or any love or affection expressed in a homosexual activity. For this reason, I do believe the ancient Jews and Christians had no understanding of homosexual orientation and regarded the activity as a perverse choice. Did this make them backward? Yes. Evil for believing it? No, any more than any primitive people are evil who have had no opportunity to have advanced as much as more enlightened cultures.

That's why I asked if you believed the Bible to be largely metaphorical, especially as regards issues like the ones we're discussing in this thread.

Well, sex, be it heterosexual or homosexual, is a group activity. I can think only of masturbation where sex isn't necessarily a group activity. But, when you talk about homosexuality as a group activity you refer to the story of Lot in Sodom where the people there wanted to rape Lot's guests, right? The other references in the Bible don't talk about homosexuality as group activity in the sense of gang activity, though. It specifically refers to a man lying with another man in the manner of a woman, a one on one, a same sex relationship, so you can't say that in every case the references are to group activity outside a twosome. That is direct evidence that the ancient Jews and Christians from the times of the writing of those passages (which spans a few hundred years) had a very lucid understanding of homosexual orientation.

Do you believe that homosexuality, the activity in which one man lies with another man in the manner of a woman, is something that developed sometime after the times of the ancient Jews and Christians from the times of the writing of those passages, a relatively modern phenomenon? You don't think that any ancient Jews and Christians from those times had homosexual orientations?

Infrablue writes


I don't think the ancient Jews even considered that there was any such thing as homosexual orientation. There is simply no account of any individual demonstrating homosexual tendencies and no accounts of same sex relationships. While the ancients were very aware of temple prostitutes and pagan ceremonies involving sex, if these should include homosexual activity, it was considered especially perverse. It has been even in my lifetime that many people were still totally ignorant of or barely aware of homosexual orientation and didn't know a soul who was gay. All gays amd lesbians of small town America thought themselves different or abnormal and kept it hidden. If ancient Jews or Christian were gay or lesbian, they almost certainly would have resisted that and would have made every effort to be 'normal', ie heterosexual. For that reason I believe any homosexual activity that was known and commented on in the Bible was public activity of a particularly lurid and perverse variety.

I think it nonproductive to assign 21st century morality to other cultures of other times, and I think anti-religious are incorrect to attempt to use the Bible now as examples of what modern Christians and Jews believe about homosexuality, and the few anti-gay Christians are incorrect to pull those passages out of the Bible as proof of what God thinks about homosexuality. On that subject, the Bible illustrates a point of view of an ancient culture but there was too little understanding of homosexual orientation for any conclusions to be drawn.

Others have pointed out that some anicent pagan cultures were less inhibited, but the ancient Jew was ordered by his religion to keep apart from those, not intermarry, etc. which would have enhance the Jewish naivete on this subject.

Well, I know some Bible quotes but I would not argue any of them. Reason? The Bible says not to waste time argueing. I like that Bible quote!! Keeps me out of Trouble. Anyway, people will always try to find sources to back up their opinions, which almost always serve their own self centered purposes. So, why worry about this silly question. Go out and play golf or something productive.