Church elects its first gay bishop
- Thread starter Dr. Ffreeze
- Start date
sonix666 said:
So if a hypothetycal(sp?) person loves to have sex with underage children, then we should respect them? How about those who have sex with animals, respect them too? And how about those that commit incest, they should also be respected?
this is the slippery slope, id love to hear what you think sonix.
later,
epicstruggle said:sonix666 said:
So if a hypothetycal(sp?) person loves to have sex with underage children, then we should respect them? How about those who have sex with animals, respect them too? And how about those that commit incest, they should also be respected?
this is the slippery slope, id love to hear what you think sonix.
later,
Pedophilia and Zoophilia are completely different in scope than homosexuality. Here's a post of mine from a prior thread. No slippery slope at all.
Natoma said:
Vince said:
I was going to write that there are plenty of passages in the bible that condemn homosexuality. However, there are also plenty of passages in the bible that condemn a whole slew of other things that I know many bible thumpers do not follow.
Eating pork, killing children if they disobey, killing your spouse if they commit adultery, women leaving the home while menstruating, eating fish on any day but friday, etc etc etc. The book of leviticus is full of good lubbin. And let's not even get into Paul.
Though, Natoma, most of that list that you show there is in the old testament (i.e. rules for jews)
Gentiles are so much more cosmopolitan.
(And eating fish on fridays isn't in the bible. That's another one of those Papal proclamations)
Gentiles are so much more cosmopolitan.
(And eating fish on fridays isn't in the bible. That's another one of those Papal proclamations)
RussSchultz said:
But Jesus stated in the new testament that the Bible in its entirety is not washed away. In fact it is immutable and stands for all time for everyone, did he not?
And if we're going to talk about Jesus, isn't it strange that Jesus spoke on everything but homosexuality as an abomination against god, i.e. himself (if you're christian of course. i know muslims think he was just another prophet)? That the only references to homosexuality in the NT were those written by Paul?
Natoma, did i at any time mention pedophilia. No. Although I should have clarified it better, what I meant was people such as marie tuttoe (sp?) the school teacher who had a baby with her student, and kept on trying to get back with him. Also elvis married priscilla at what 13. These types of people sicken me for taking advantage of children, but they are not pedophiles. My point also applies to pedos, since decades ago they classified (if my memory serves me right) that homosexuality was a mental disease. Werent there scientist who also (many centuries ago) compare blacks to apes. So todays science classifies pedophilia one way today, but tomorrow they might get the same rights your fighting for.
(i hope this post makes sense as Im drifting to sleep.)
later,
(i hope this post makes sense as Im drifting to sleep.)
later,
yeah that stopped alot of people from doing those types of things. plus you can go to any number of 3rd world countries where that type of behavior is not illegal.
hey in ten years maybe theyll drop the age of consent altogether. Lets state the recent trends:
laws lowering age of consent
avg age of first sexual act lower and lower
not uncommon for 10-12 year olds to have sex.
thats the problem with the slippery slope.
later,
hey in ten years maybe theyll drop the age of consent altogether. Lets state the recent trends:
laws lowering age of consent
avg age of first sexual act lower and lower
not uncommon for 10-12 year olds to have sex.
thats the problem with the slippery slope.
later,
Well, to be pedantic, he didn't say that the bible in its entirety is not washed away. The bible didn't exist in its current form when he was around. He did say the old laws were not washed away, though "at the same time" debate with the parasees over the meaning of those laws. Another one of those mysteries that many people like to call contradictions.Natoma said:
Jesus also didn't say it was wrong to own slaves, but we seem to reject that idea this day also.
Yes.
Read, what Jesus said to Saint Peter
Matthew 16:19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on the earth will have been bound in heaven, and whatever you release on earth will have been released in heaven."
Then read the Acts of Apostle when Saint Peter spoke, in regard to disagreement about Gentiles and Law of Moses.
15:1 Now some men came down from Judea and began to teach the brothers, "Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved." 15:2 When Paul and Barnabas had a major argument and debate with them, the church appointed Paul and Barnabas and some others from among them to go up to meet with the apostles and elders in Jerusalem about this point of disagreement. 15:3 So they were sent on their way by the church, and as they passed through both Phoenicia and Samaria they were relating at length the conversion of the Gentiles and bringing great joy to all the brothers. 15:4 When they arrived in Jerusalem, they were received by the church and the apostles and the elders, and they reported all the things God had done with them. 15:5 But some from the religious party of the Pharisees who had believed stood up and said, "It is necessary to circumcise the Gentiles and to order them to observe the law of Moses."
15:6 Both the apostles and the elders met together to deliberate about this matter. 15:7 After there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, "Brothers, you know that some time ago God chose that from my mouth the Gentiles should hear the message of the gospel and believe. 15:8 And God, who knows the heart,23 has testified24 to them by giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us, 15:9 and he made no distinction between them and us, cleansing their hearts by faith. 15:10 So now why are you putting God to the test by placing on the neck of the disciples a yoke that neither our ancestors nor we have been able to bear? 15:11 On the contrary, we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they are."
15:12 The whole group kept quiet and listened to Barnabas and Paul while they explained all the miraculous signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them.
The Church has always have authority over the Bible. So listen to what the Church has to teach.
Yes, because Paul was writting to Gentiles, Gentiles didn't have the moral standard of the Jews. Jesus mostly spoke to Jews. The Jews already have the law of Moses, that prohibit homosexuality. But in regard to marriage, our Lord did explain, what the law meant. A union between a man and a woman till death.
Just curious with all this bible quoting.. does anyone stop to think how much of the text may have been altered over the last 2000 some odd years? By either translation faults, or even just Church-as-state-agenda-pushing from hundreds of years back?
I'm not religious to begin with, but if I did, the integrity of the bible text would be the first thing that would pop into my head (just the kind of person I am I suppose, which is why I guess i'm not religious!).
I'm not religious to begin with, but if I did, the integrity of the bible text would be the first thing that would pop into my head (just the kind of person I am I suppose, which is why I guess i'm not religious!).
Having sex with underage children is in a completely different league than homosexuality, and I am quite unhappy that you even try to compare these two things with eachother. Children aren't completely matured and don't always completely know what is best for them and therefore should be protected. Homosexuals however and thus something completely different.
Having sex with animals is in the same league as children.
Yes, one could think there are translation faults, changes, etc, afterall before printing was invented, the Bible were copied by hand manually, and the only time most Christians has exposured to it, was when they came to Church and scriptures was read. Not too mentioned Luther took out some book and changed the meaning of some verse in his translation. You've every right to be sceptic about these preservations.
That's why you need, the Church. Afterall Christ unlike Moses or Mohammad didn't write books, but build his Church, to proclaime the Gospel, baptise all nations and teach them for eternal salvation.
N.B Scholars do have old manuscripts of the books in the Bible, but I am not sure any of them were originals.
Joe DeFuria
Legend
sonix666 said:
It's certainly not the same, but they can be related on specific levels. And I say this dispite the 'wrath of Natoma' that is sure to come down for making such a statement.
For that matter, Adults don't always know what is best for them. I'd further argue that NO person really understands what marriage or a sexual relationship entails until they actully enter into one. Yet, the law doesn't require that they take some intelligence or ignorance test before they get married or worse, have kids.
At what age is a person "mature enough" to be responsible for his own actions? Why is that age "special"?
Why should 10 year old, who really, truly, wants to marry a 20 year old, be denied right to try and succeed or fail at marriage? If a 10 year old "consents" to sexual activity, what is wrong with that? It's just pure age discrimination, isn't it? Shouldn't the 10 year old have the same right to succeed or fail at marriage? Be happy or get hurt in a failed marriage or sexual relationship like everyone else?
If the relationship is mutually consenting, why is it different? Just two people who willfully engage each other.
No, with respect to your definitions, it's not: You cannot get verbal or written consent from an animal. And even though it can certainly be argued that consent can be inferred, you certainly can't guarantee than an animal is aware of the "consequences" of entering into a relationship or marriage.
An honest question: what are your thoughts on incest? That's certainly, per your own reasoning, the same as homosexuality: two consenting "adults". (Mature enough to understand what they're doing.)
Dr. Ffreeze
Regular
Just a thought,
Biblically, sex outside of the holey union of marriage is wrong. Biblically, marriage is between a man and a woman. How then would same sex, sex not be wrong as it is not in marriage?
Dr. Ffreeze
Biblically, sex outside of the holey union of marriage is wrong. Biblically, marriage is between a man and a woman. How then would same sex, sex not be wrong as it is not in marriage?
Dr. Ffreeze