quote:The New Testament ISN'T history. It is LIVING TRUTH.
but all the pictures in my children's illustrated bible seem to indicate that the new testament takes place pretty far in the past, kind of like the old testament. perhaps your bible has different pictures?
i like how you disregard the old testament and its lessons as a temporary "stand-in" for the new testament - it's as if you could slap a "new and improved" sticker on the new testament. i'm sure those of the jewish faith appreciate their religion being viewed as nothing but a babysitter for christians.
i'm not sure what you find irritating about dante - i appreciate his/her ability and willingness to articulate thoughts and back up statements with evidence for others to see and question. he/she does not resort to petty sulking or name-calling. it's quite refreshing.
quote:if you don't want to do that, or don't know any nice pastors, or hate all Christians, i can only say one thing : sucks to be you.
quote: Oh, excuuuuse me, rockrgirl, and now because you have told me not to pick on Dante I will immediately fall on my knees and agree with all he/she/it says, and I will do whatever you will. *bows head*
*not*
Hey ... it was a suggestion.
I can't actually force you to be reasonable.
quote:I suppose that whatver Jesus left out instantly became old news huh? that's how it seems to me.
Oh, excuuuuse me, rockrgirl, and now because you have told me not to pick on Dante I will immediately fall on my knees and agree with all he/she/it says, and I will do whatever you will. *bows head*
*not*
Lots of love, Lynne
I suppose that whatver Jesus left out instantly became old news huh? that's how it seems to me.
quote: All those laws and stuff, the menstrual stuff, two crops, all that stuff, that was the stand-in for Jesus's sacrifice until he came to earth. All that stuff was that so faithful people could have a way to heaven even if jesus hadn't been around yet. When Jesus came, all that stuff when out the window, except the stuff he mentions.
So who threw them out? Who decided which ones stayed and which ones were gone? Because if Jesus got rid of all those rules when he appeared on the scene, why didn't he get rid of the rule against homosexuals too? Why all the other ones and not that one?
Just trying to understand the logic ...
And don't pick on Dante. I agree with just about everything he says.
Oh, people, if I didn't not like swearing I would be cussing up a storm. GET YOUR FRIGGIN FACTS STRAIGHT BEFORE ATTACKING THE BIBLE. Let's take it one step at a time:
the Old Testament is just that: old. It is HISTORY. HISTORY, hear that? To Jews it is all there is, but to Christians it is HISTORY.
The New Testament ISN'T history. It is LIVING TRUTH. The Old Testament is included in the package for some background, because Jesus does, frequently, quote the Old Testament. This was to show the Jews that he knew what he was talking about. I think that the things that Jesus quotes from the O.T. were - are - things that were changed by the new covenant. All those laws and stuff, the menstrual stuff, two crops, all that stuff, that was the stand-in for Jesus's sacrifice until he came to earth. All that stuff was that so faithful people could have a way to heaven even if jesus hadn't been around yet. When Jesus came, all that stuff when out the window, except the stuff he mentions.
And if you didn't understand this, go find a nice pastor and he will love to help you out. And if you don't want to do that, or don't know any nice pastors, or hate all Christians, i can only say one thing : sucks to be you.
And dante, just get over yourself, please? i'm sick of running to the bathroom and puking whenever I read one of your posts. And I do that a lot because, I swear, you have like 5000 posts on every subject in the universe.
If you would care to discuss this further, send me NOISEmail or something. Or to discuss anything at all. Oh, and Nik, thanks for the laughs--brilliant. (see original post)>>
Haha thanks I saw it on a Kylie Minogue fan board (of course, kylie is nutorious for plenty of gay male fans) and I thought it was fantastic. Theres a couple variations on the Homosexuality thread but I thought it deserved a thread of it's own!
You tell 'em. Good for you. But, guys, is this really an argument about arguments or the Bible?
Anyway, I say that the Bible shouldn't be taken seriously anymore. It's very outdated. And besides, what's the purpose of religion? A long time ago it was to explain natural occurences, but since then a little thing called science has solved most of the mysteries for us. So who says the Bible is right? It's a little behind the times...
Oh, yeah, I know that it explains the purpose of life itself, but I'm working on it...
So, my views are clear--"live and let live". If someone is homosexual, that's nobody's problem. Nobody should be persecuted for their preferences, just like all people's views should be respected and taken seriously.
If you would care to discuss this further, send me NOISEmail or something. Or to discuss anything at all. Oh, and Nik, thanks for the laughs--brilliant. (see original post)
Oh, and Joey, if you're really having trouble comprehending all those big words due to my oh so horrid spelling I'd be glad to help you out... Of course, if you're having trouble reading it, it migh just be a problem of your own.
A little off topic but: I use a gender ambiguous moniker (I didn't think so originally, but I guess it is) and I have never chose to specify one way or another, those that know also don't mention it.
Is my writing style effeminate? That is the second time someone has used the pronoun 'she' for me. I thought I was a little more neutral.
Are my opinions or positions feminine?
I just find this really interesting as far as our perceptions of gender and such.
Same with racial matters. I choose not to designate. Yet I would figure most would assume I'm white. rightly or wrongly.
I purposefully try not to define myself too specifically so I find it intriguing when other people interpret what they see one way or the other.
Anyway, this is completely off topic and I'd start a new topic if I really wanted to talk about myself at length. As always though, you can NOISEmail me or some other such thing.
quote: Dante, the New Testament was a new "covenant" and the NEW covenant replaces the OLD covenant.
But it's still included and parts of the NT emphasize respecting the laws of Moses.
In Islam and LDS they believe in even newer covenants, yet they don't include the works of the Bible in their standard lit (however I have seen trilogy Bibles with the OT, NT, and the Books of Mormon).
Jesus often referenced OT occurrences and used them as basis for what he taught.
It’s not divorced from the old scriptures. You can’t pick and choose, i.e. you like Genesis but not Leviticus. Christians are the most die-hard Ten Commandment people. That’s just how it goes. New covenant, old teachings.
quote: Then again, Dante, you know everything. You seem to hit every argument with your expertise and knowledge; I'm real surprised that such a smart young man is on YouthNOISE - seriously, you seem to have everything figured out.
You're bitter because I can back up what I say. Now you resort to petty sarcasm instead of logic. Defend your beliefs, not yourself. Don’t take it so personally. It’s not about you.
People like me exist and are going to give you hell all your life. Better you find that out now than you lose your temper at the first knowledgeable person you run into out there. I will simply not concede to you your interpretation of the Bible simply because you believe in it. If anything that hampers your ability to be objective.
quote: Hey Dante, it's good that you cite your sources and stuff - always good to have facts to back up your argument.
I agree
quote: However, if I were working on a story about this homosexual thing, I would have at least two sides, or sources - for instance: One man thinks the lifestyle is natural as opposed to the other who believes Jesus Christ delivered him from it.
I figured you were that source and it was pretty obvious most people were ready to concede to you. You had your interpreted Bible; it was pretty clear what you thought it was supposed to say. Side one. I countered with a different interpretation based on evidence I’ve gathered. Side two.
quote: You cite websites that are pro-same sex and pro-Christian homosexual. It's completely biased and you have no argument for the "other" side.
Not true. It’s obvious to anyone what I was advocating. It was also obvious that the great mass of Christianity feels differently. No need to explain it anymore, especially when it’s not correct. It’s fair to simply acknowledge that there are people who feel differently while reading the same text. I’ll leave it to the individual reader to, when given all the evidence, decide for themselves.
Obviously the people who are going to supply this information are on one side of the argument. It would disrupt hundred of years of dogma for the Catholic Church to post this widely.
Regardless, it does not take away from the factual accuracy of what I presented.
quote: I've talked with a few people who said Jesus Christ delivered them from their lifestyle - hmm, where is this information on the sites you provided? I couldn't find any.
I can’t say anything definitively about those people. Everybody needs something. Personally I would view them as weak minded or they had strong influences on their lives.
Sometimes people get really depressed or in a place they don’t want to be and they look for something, sometimes they’ll latch onto anything. Faith helps, it takes the burden out of your hands, but that’s not a desirable thing for a lot of people. They’d rather be in charge of their own direction.
That’s just speculation and my thoughts. I’ve known druggies before who are now Young Life leaders. If that’s what they wanted, to get out of that life, then they found a way.
quote: And speaking of citing sources, maybe you should also cite a dictionary. The paragraphs are a bit unreadable with all those spelling errors.
That’s just bitter, and unwarranted. I found a few grammatical errors but very few spelling mistakes. But, for the grammar of course, a dictionary would do no good.
quote: Hmm, anyway. Just more of your shopping cart mentality I guess. Pick and choose what you want.
Funny for you to say that.
quote: It's the same way with these websites you posted. Same old shopping cart mentality - the homosexual topics are considered "too harsh" for people, so some church denominations decide to soften it up a bit.
Some churches teach acceptance without knowing it has biblical basis and this is wrong, They choose to use Jesus’s “love your neighbor”-type teachings to supercede his apostles letters and their interpretation. That isn’t the way to go about it when you could very well just point out that the popular interpretation of the Greek and Hebrew texts don’t say what most people assume they say and that it is a shame two thousand years of translation and bias have rendered inaccurate texts.
quote: And unfortunately, you bit into their bait by citing biased sources.
See above.
quote: "Truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but, in the end, there it is." Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965) Beautiful, beautiful quote.
It’s true, as much as you might try to deny it, the truth will succeed and you have yet to provide any counter besides your bias and slander.
Just a question: what would you do if shown that nowhere in the Bible did it condemn same-sex relationships in the way you claim they do? Would you still deride gay-rights as PC and wrong? Would you accept gays into your church and admit they won’t burn forever? Would you have to find someone else to rail against? Who would you accuse of corrupting the youth and destroying “morality”? Or would morality not have been damaged because what you perceived as degradation was really just the advancement of knowledge?
And speaking of citing sources, maybe you should also cite a dictionary. The paragraphs are a bit unreadable with all those spelling errors.>>
I had no problem reading her response. Perhaps you might want to go back to 8th grade, it would certainly suit your additude right now.
I've talked with a few people who said Jesus Christ delivered them from their lifestyle - hmm, where is this information on the sites you provided? I couldn't find any.>>
Ummm maybe those sites haven't spoken to the same people as you? It's a big world out there Joey, maybe you better log off and smell the fresh air.
It's completely biased and you have no argument for the "other" side. >>
Please link me to a post where you have. I'm not saying you haven't, but if you have I'm dying to read it.
It's the same way with these websites you posted. Same old shopping cart mentality - the homosexual topics are considered "too harsh" for people, so some church denominations decide to soften it up a bit.>>
Could it be this is just the way these websites interpret the Bible? You certainly have your own interpretations (yes, interpretations dear, unless you have proof -- which I'd love to see), can't the makers of these websites?
"Truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but, in the end, there it is." Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
Beautiful, beautiful quote.
<JoeyDauben>
Posted
Hey Dante, it's good that you cite your sources and stuff - always good to have facts to back up your argument.
However, if I were working on a story about this homosexual thing, I would have at least two sides, or sources - for instance:
One man thinks the lifestyle is natural as opposed to the other who believes Jesus Christ delivered him from it.
You cite websites that are pro-same sex and pro-Christian homosexual.
It's completely biased and you have no argument for the "other" side.
I've talked with a few people who said Jesus Christ delivered them from their lifestyle - hmm, where is this information on the sites you provided? I couldn't find any.
And speaking of citing sources, maybe you should also cite a dictionary. The paragraphs are a bit unreadable with all those spelling errors.
Hmm, anyway. Just more of your shopping cart mentality I guess. Pick and choose what you want.
It's the same way with these websites you posted. Same old shopping cart mentality - the homosexual topics are considered "too harsh" for people, so some church denominations decide to soften it up a bit.
And unfortunately, you bit into their bait by citing biased sources.
<JoeyDauben>
Posted
No Brooke, I merely stated that if people are going to cite a verse and/or verses dealing with anti-homosexual debate, then they should pick one that homosexuals haven't picked apart.
I'm not disregarding any verse.
I put the Romans verse out there so that people could see a New Testament argument.
Dante, the New Testament was a new "covenant" and the NEW covenant replaces the OLD covenant.
Then again, Dante, you know everything. You seem to hit every argument with your expertise and knowledge; I'm real surprised that such a smart young man is on YouthNOISE - seriously, you seem to have everything figured out.
What I was talking about was what Paul meant, rather than what's wrong with Pagan beliefs.
Personally I choose not to express my views on paganism so much, but not that I'm tihnking I'll probably post on one of the many Wicca/Pagan threads going on.
However, the Bible clearly and, more often than it "condemns" homosexuality, condemns paganism and its rituals. This is simply how it is. Regardless of it's misconceptions or "intolerance" it simply doesn't agree with at least teh pagan worship going on at the time.
For the Bible to condemn it, of course, it obviously had to exist prior to the writing of the scripture (which it very much did), but long history is essentially meaningless to the point of this discussion.
what I was saying is this "condemnation" of homosexuality was not that and it was more of an attack on paganism that anything else.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the laws presented here those for governing the tribes of Israel? I may be thinking of something else. Not being Jewish, these laws then would be unnapplicable to those outside the religion.
Hehe, that's cute. But I agree with most of you. And they're right, Joey. You can't just pick and choose Bible excerpts to back up things you believe when many other excerpts contradict themselves. I think the Bible's fiction, anyway. Bah humbug )
Topics 
)
