Flare Sci-Fi Forums: Is there room for religion in the Gay Lifestyle?

This is topic Is there room for religion in the Gay Lifestyle? in forum The Flameboard at Flare Sci-Fi Forums.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://flare.solareclipse.net/ultimatebb.php/topic/11/466.html

Posted by Mikey T (Member # 144) on :

I am doing a research paper for my English class concerning religion in the lives of gays and lesbians. The reason I'm posting this is because I want some input from people who think people can be gay and religious or otherwise. I'd post it on the officer lounge area, but the language may become heated here.

------------------
"Life's a bitch, then you die"
-USS Luzon, Vanderbuilt Class starship

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

Sure there is. Why wouldn't there be?

------------------
"While it is true that 15% of home accidents are caused by large penis related incidents, only a small number have ever been known to be fatal."
****
Read chapter one of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet"!

Posted by Baloo (Member # 5) on :

Whether you regard the gay lifestyle a sin (and I consider a promiscuous lifestyle, regardless of the partners' sexes, to be sinful, i.e.: damaging to the participants and/or others) there is a lot going on in everyone's life. I know of people who thought their "big sin" was a foul mouth, but that wasn't what they wound up dealing with first. In most cases, it was the way they dealt with other people, learning to treat them with love and respect.

That's the acid test of any religion: how does it lead you to treat others, and how do you expect them to treat you. Even an athiest can be a doormat or a self-centered contol freak. Neither is good, religion or not.

I happen to believe an earnest desire to have a relationship with God will lead you to a better understanding of your own worth and that of others. If all you want is a lever to get others to bend to your will, or if you let others use it to hit you over the head and bend you to their will, then it's bad whether you're strait, gay, bi, or unclassifiable.

--Baloo

------------------
"Nice guys finish last? I'll say we do!
(Sometimes we last for hours.)"
-- Me
http://www.geocities.com/cyrano_jones.geo/

[This message has been edited by Baloo (edited May 23, 2000).]

Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :

I just want to say a few things.

1. I personally know three glb's (gay, lesbian, or bisexual) not counting any people I know who I DON'T know are g,l, or b.

2. They're all pretty much as monogamous as I am. Moreso, in fact. One of them has had TWO relationships, and considers that a big deal.

I disbelieve in all this baloney rhetoric about the 'gay lifestyle.' There's no more a 'gay lifestyle' than there is a 'people who use PC's lifestyle.' Oh, there's always people, within ANY community, who band together in what they believe their 'type' is SUPPOSED to be like, who follow oter people's lead.. but that happens everywhere.

As to whether there's room for religion in the 'gay lifestyle,' I agree: why not?

------------------
"Nobody knows this, but I'm scared all the time... of what I might do, if I ever let go." -- Michael Garibaldi

Posted by Elim Garak (Member # 14) on :

"Why not?" is a very good question, with no good answers, as far as I'm concerned.

But I don't think that suffices for an English essay.

Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :

We've had gay priests, parishoners, and popes. I would think that that would settle the matter right there.

Now, that doesn't mean that religious gays don't often have problems dealing with what is sometimes seen as conflicts between their nature and their religion; witness that Mormon kid I heard about on one of the news channels recently who killed himself because he couldn't reconcile his problems.
However, many of us probably have conflicts between what we believe (or more often, what we're told to believe) and what we sometimes do, whether or not we wish to or not. It isn't easy to reconcile being what you are with living under a mindset that condemns being what you are.

Of course, we're being unfair if we confine out idea of 'religion' solely to wester Judeo-Christian thought. Unfortunately, I don't know enough about other religions to know their viewpoints.

------------------
"Nobody knows this, but I'm scared all the time... of what I might do, if I ever let go." -- Michael Garibaldi

Posted by LOA (Member # 49) on :

Yes, I think there is.... in fact, I did a paper similar to this just last fall.....

A lot of "religious people" disagree with me, but I truly do think that you can be gay and still not "go to hell"

However, if it's going to come down to quoting the scripture or anything, I've heard it battled VERY well either way.... I don't think you're going to find any easy answers here... just lots of personal opinion.....

~LOA

PS~ if this helps at all, I have a VERY openly gay friend who goes to my Christian College with me... he went to HS with me, and we even went to church together for a while... he's very religious, and gay at the same time... I don't see a problem with it, and there's no doubt in my mind that if the end were to come today, he'd be heaven bound.

------------------
No, you CAN'T see my picture!

Posted by David Sands (Member # 132) on :

Michael,

Here is an article put on britannica.com just this week on some of what you might be doing your paper on. Hope this helps.

http://www.britannica.com/bcom/religion/0,5758,,00.html

------------------
"Warfare is the greatest affair of state, the basis of life and death, the Tao to survivial or extinction. It must be thoroughly pondered and analyzed."

"...attaining one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the pinnacle of excellence. Subjugating the enemy's army without fighting is the true pinnacle of excellence."

-Sun Tzu, The Art of War, 6th century B.C.E.

Posted by Mikey T (Member # 144) on :

Thanks everyone for all the input, and thanks David for the article link.

I've been busy for a while that's why I haven't been around much. I've been helping Justin pack for college...

------------------
"Life's a bitch, then you die"
-USS Luzon, Vanderbuilt Class starship

Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :

Nothing from our more conservatively religious members?

Oh, well. Ignore this, I was just stirring the coals.

------------------
"Nobody knows this, but I'm scared all the time... of what I might do, if I ever let go." -- Michael Garibaldi

Posted by bryce (Member # 42) on :

He asked us not to comment and his question was not aimed at us.

------------------
If you don't believe in what I say or the God I speak of I guess you'll just have to meet me so the Lord and I can convert you.

Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :

No, I don't think he did. Note the 'or otherwise.' in the first post:

"I want some input from people who think people can be gay and religious or otherwise"

I took this to mean he wanted opinions from both sides of the issue.

Unless he asked you not to outside of the thread, I don't think you were requested not to comment. If so, I'll respect that.

Not that it's all that important what your opinion is anyways.. just kidding.
I suppose since it's June now, the paper's been written anyway?

------------------
"Nobody knows this, but I'm scared all the time... of what I might do, if I ever let go." -- Michael Garibaldi

[This message has been edited by First of Two (edited June 03, 2000).]

Posted by BlueElectron (Member # 281) on :

Not to burst the bubbles for you guys, but the bible clearly states that homosexuality is, for a lack of a better word, "hated" by God. I'm not an expert in the bible, but I'd say being gay is consider a sin, and for gay people who want to go to heavn in the same time, well...lady luck is not on your side! But don't get me wrong, I totally thinks that gay people should be treated like normal human beings.

BTW, do you know that blood is consider to be an holy item that contain our soul? So this means a REAL christian are not suppose to donate or recieve blood in any case of emergency, so he'll probably die on the operation table if an accident does occur. But hey, God works in "mysterious ways"!

And for all of you out there having active sex life before marriage, you're chance of going to heaven probably just decrease by like 99%!

------------------
Okey, okey, here's my question:

If you are an immortal, do you "rot" simply because of the
nuclear decay of the Carbon-14 particles inside your body?

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

Well, I'm all for pointing out the fallacies in belief systems, but, at least in Christianity, sins don't preclude going to heaven.

That doesn't mean I agree that the notion of love between two men (the Bible never mentions lesbians) is somehow evil or wrong. But I do think it's important to fully understand the beliefs of others before attempting to pick them apart.

Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :

>"Not to burst the bubbles for you guys, but the bible clearly states that homosexuality is, for a lack of a better word, "hated" by God"

perhaps, but so is eating seafood, and wearing 50%polyester clothes.

on the other hand, stoning your rebellious child to death is considered a good thing. o_0

Of course, I'm not going to Heaven anyway, (dull, dull, dreadfully DULL!) so the rest of it doesn't concern me much.

------------------
"Nobody knows this, but I'm scared all the time... of what I might do, if I ever let go." -- Michael Garibaldi

Posted by BlueElectron (Member # 281) on :

First of Two:

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to say that gay people "should" go to hell, I think they rather shouldn't. I'm just writing out the facts according to the bible that's all.

I'm not really a religious man, but personally, I'm leaning toward Buddhism, in my opinion, it's more "scientifically sound".

We can not deny all the positive effects of Christianity, but in the end, I don't think that it can escape the term of "benevolent dictator".

------------------
If a diamonds is a woman's best friend, why does a man has to settle for a dog?

- Thomas Tang (A.K.A BlueElectron)

Posted by bryce (Member # 42) on :

What's the Dictator stuff?

What was the blood and surgery thing about?

No First, I won't write a paper on it, all that needed to be said was said in Scripture. Christianity and Homosexuality is purely an American-Christianity problem (well, Europe too.) Christians in India, Africa, and where ever don't have this discussion amongst themselves or with anyone else.

I'll state my position again. I believe homosexuality is a redeemable sin (like all sins except rejection of the Holy Spirit) and that through the divine work of God a homosexual maybe changed to a heterosexual person. This is just as a person with a lust problem can pray to God and have his/her lust problem taken away. I'm not preaching a new Christian thought, I'm just preaching the redemption of Man.

------------------
If you don't believe in what I say or the God I speak of I guess you'll just have to meet me so the Lord and I can convert you.

[This message has been edited by bryce (edited June 05, 2000).]

Posted by BlueElectron (Member # 281) on :

A gay person doesn't want to be change to a hetrosexual person just like a hetrosexual person doesn't want to be change into a gay person.

------------------
If a diamond is a woman's best friend, why does a man has to settle for a dog?

- Thomas Tang (A.K.A BlueElectron)

Posted by Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs (Member # 239) on :

quote:
BlueElectron: I'm just writing out the facts according to the bible that's all.

Y'know, it might just be me, but I've yet to see any of the 'facts' of which you speak.

Perhaps a little more indepth research is needed for opinions to formed, and argued intelligently.

------------------
"Ultra Magnus is Undeniably Fun!" David Stevens, New York Magazine.
"Total Complete excitement from start to finish!" -WPIX-TV, New York
"This isn't a thrill ride, it's a rocket..." -Richard Caves, Time Magazine.

Posted by Baloo (Member # 5) on :

That's why so many did not respond.

I look at it this way:

If homosexuality isn't a sin, then why not? (Have a religeous affiliation, I mean.)

If homosexuality is a sin, then look at it this way -- Do you need to get cleaned up before you're allowed to take a bath?

If it isn't a sin, then no problem. If it is, then G-d will deal with it -- just as he'll deal with pride, lust, envy, hate, etc. If homosexuality is a sin, it isn't a "special" sin that G-d has any less tolerance for than others. A lot of Christians need to get off of that pedestal they like to climb onto when talking to non-believers.

Of course, the non-believers need to climb off their pedestals, too. The proof of your religeon (or lack of one) is the way you treat others. If atheism (or Zoarastrianism, or Islam, or Hinduism, or Buddism, or Christianity, for that matter) is superior to whatever I profess, then why doesn't it allow you to treat me like a human being deserving of compassion and respect?

~~Baloo

------------------
The Authors of the previous quote have been sacked. We would like to apologize for the low quality of the quote and have you ever been bitten by a m��se?

http://www.geocities.com/cyrano_jones.geo/

[This message has been edited by Baloo (edited June 06, 2000).]

Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :

Hear, hear. It should be so, Baloo.

Although to simply answer the question, I think the reason is that just about all belief systems (atheism included) teach, either dirctly or by implication, that those who follow other paths are deluded, either on purpose or by accident. It's hard to respect the ideas of people you think are delusional.

------------------
"Nobody knows this, but I'm scared all the time... of what I might do, if I ever let go." -- Michael Garibaldi

Posted by bryce (Member # 42) on :

At least on my part, you're misunderstanding what I was trying to say.

A very good evangelist (sp.?) would teach anyone that you must respect the people you talk to if you want to have any influence on their lives.

------------------
If you don't believe in what I say or the God I speak of I guess you'll just have to meet me so the Lord and I can convert you.

[This message has been edited by bryce (edited June 07, 2000).]

Posted by Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs (Member # 239) on :

Is Jack Van Impe a good evangelist? He scares me. I wonder who'd win if he got in a fight with that guy from 'Hour of Power'. Hmm...Pseudo-Celebrity deathmatch idea...

Posted by Baloo (Member # 5) on :

The problem with "evangelizing" one's religion, whether it's Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddism, etc., is this: People tend to approach the problem of informing others of their beliefs like they do any other situation where they feel they need to persuade someone else. In some cases, they don't really believe it themselves, and can only validate their (shaky) choice to believe by convincing others. Hey, If I can convince you, then maybe I'm right after all?

Others just don't understand how someone could possibly disagree with them. They don't seem to understand that you're not clairvoyant, and therefore don't have the same understanding of the subject you do. You've met people like this, haven't you? Even outside the context of evangelism -- they're the people who believe you're disagreeing with them for the simple pleasure of watching them get steamed. Either that, or you've already signed with the opposition and therefore your position must be brutally dissected and debunked, just so any onlookers can be sure that you are wrong, and they are right. These are the folks that treat any form of disagreement with them as a personal insult.

Yes, it's dysfunctional, but hey, a lot of folks go into "helping carreers" (medicine, social work, psychology, etc.) because at some level they want to "fix" everything, including you. Why shouldn't a vocation (or avocation, in the case of non-ordained evangelists) that includes "helping people find G-d" attract some of these "fixers?

Then, of course, there's the folks who don't really believe, but either figure it (religion) is a good, legal way to separate a fool from his money and gain instant respect and credibility (within the group, anyway), or feel that, if religion is a crock, it's a crock that helps others, even if it doesn't help them, so why not help perpetuate it and get some of that "feel good" second-hand, by helping others to feel good?

Getting back to the OP however, stop and remember some of the folks who've been just as obnoxiously "righteous" about such non-religious topics as the length of the Defiant, capitalism v.s. communism, or gun rights v.s. gun control. I do think that the Bible specifically states that homosexuality is wrong, but there are some indications that this injunction against same-sex intimacy, may be directed at ritual sex, and might not even apply to women at all.

I figure that G-d chooses whom to call, and it's an individual's choice whether they will listen. My witness is my life and how I try to live it (those of you who know me, know it isn't always a bed of roses ). If you want to ask me about something related to my religion, go ahead, but remember that I believe "I don't know" is an honest answer, and does not invalidate my beliefs. If you don't ask, I won't try to buttonhole you and MAKE YOU LISTEN YOU NO-GOOD DURTY HEATHEN!

It isn't my job to herd people into the kingdom of heaven. Neither is it my responsibility to bar the way of others seeking entry. I just try to ensure I'm standing in the right line, and not stepping on any toes (unintentionally -- some toes need treading upon ). I believe if you really seek truth, you'll find just as much as you can handle. If that's not what you're looking for, you'll find something else. If you're seeking justification to continue doing things the way you have been, you'll probably find that. If you're looking for ways to control others (or abdicate responsibility for your own decisions by allowing others to control you), then that's what you'll find.

The truth never hurts anyone, but it sure can irk the hell out of some folks.

~~Baloo

------------------
Beer lovers take note:
Stroh's spelled backwards is "shorts."

http://www.geocities.com/cyrano_jones.geo/

[This message has been edited by Baloo (edited June 08, 2000).]

Posted by Saiyanman Benjita (Member # 122) on :

< Christian antagonist mode >I'm not against gays (anymore), nor do I believe that all gays will ultimately go to hell. However, there is scripture in the bible Leviticus 13: 20, I think? Man shall not lay(have sex in the New English Version) with another man as he does with a woman, it is an abomination. That means sin. If you believe the Bible to be true, then you believe homosexuality to be sinful (There's another passage in 1 Corinthians about it as well, but I cannot remember at this time.) But the Bible also says Romans 5:23-For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. This means everyone has sinned at least once in their life (You can lie to yourselves, but God knows it to be true). But God offers a way to salvation through Jesus Christ, the Lord.

However, If you are gay, and continue to be gay, you cannot say you are righteous through Christ (For you are continuing to sin), elsewise you would be labeled as a hypocrite. This goes for those who continually lie, steal, swear, and lust. All sins are equal through the eyes of God (That includes "little white lies"). This does not mean all people go to hell. You can seek salvation (Quote Jesus: Go and sin no more.) This goes for the pre-marital sex line a few posts back (However, the sexual sins are lust, adultery, and rape, the bible does not specify pre-marital sex as a sin {In the passage in Genesis 6, it does not mention anything about a wedding ceremony, just the joining of one man and one woman. Does that mean if you meet your intended, then it's okay?}, more of a cultural sin.)
< /Christian antagonist mode >

Let me repeat my first line, I'm not anti-Gay (anymore). I used to be when the only gay I knew was this annoying ugly prick who wouldn't stop talking about his sex life. It's really annoying when the only time he talks, it sounds like a bad porn description. He also said openly that he was a Christian. In this case, I don't think his lifestyle fit the Christian mold, and gave Gays and Christians a bad name. Since then, almost all the gays I know are regular people. So I'm not anymore.

------------------
Well I'm a Bada$$ cowboy living in a cowboy day wicky-wicky-wak yo yo bang bang
me and Artemus Clydefrog go save Selma Hayek from the big metal spider
Wicky-wicky-wak wicky-wicky-wicky-wak
Bada$$ cowboy from the West Si-yiide

[This message has been edited by Saiyanman Benjita (edited June 08, 2000).]

Posted by Saiyanman Benjita (Member # 122) on :

Deletes double post

[This message has been edited by Saiyanman Benjita (edited June 08, 2000).]

Posted by bryce (Member # 42) on :

I think it's Romans 3:23.

Marriage is ordained by God. When you consummate a marriage that is the most important part. The ceremony was developed later and I believe there should be a ceremony because Jesus never said anything against it. I would say Adam and Eve were not married, because there was no one else there to do it.

This is the theological reason why pre-marital sex is wrong; we almost never have it with our final mate. By the time most of us are married we are "married" to a few other people as well. It has been scientifically proven that women chemically bond in their minds to the men they have sex with.

With what Baloo was saying:
It takes a very experienced person to do this sort of thing. I wouldn't say I'm qualified, and I don't think most clergy are. You can't be trained for converting a certain type of person, just people in general, and then hands on experience and a lot of faith works the best.

Something another person said::
It is a position in the conservative side of the Church that homosexuals MUST repent of their lifestyle to be saved. On the conservative side, there is not acceptance of Gay/Lesbian/Bi Christians.

Bye for now.

------------------
If you don't believe in what I say or the God I speak of I guess you'll just have to meet me so the Lord and I can convert you.

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

"It has been scientifically proven that women chemically bond in their minds to the men they have sex with."

Ohhhhhkay...

Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :

Hey, doesn't it also say in Leviticus that if you catch two people committing homosexual acts, you're supposed to have them killed?

Well? Can one follow part of the law, without following the other part?

as for Romans and Corinthians... was that God talking, or just Paul and his opinions?

------------------
"Nobody knows this, but I'm scared all the time... of what I might do, if I ever let go." -- Michael Garibaldi

Posted by bryce (Member # 42) on :

First, you have brought that up (Lev.) before and I have answered it before. For those of you who haven't heard the answer hear it goes again.

OT law is seen by most Chrisians as the law for the Hewbrews, which Christians are not. We only look at these laws for advice and how to handle situations, we rarely do what it really says. Christians mostly read the OT Prophets and the Psalms, Proverbs, ect. Find a Christian and ask them the last time they read Lev., Num., or Duet.; mostly it will have been a while.

Everything in the Bible like the example First brought up in his post is looked at by responsible theologians using the information we have on the culture and the history of the times and places. (For example, most churches today will let women teach men the Bible, Paul said to never allow it.)

No Christian would stone a homosexual, and if they scream on TV they did it for Christ, Satan has them bad!

------------------
If you don't believe in what I say or the God I speak of I guess you'll just have to meet me so the Lord and I can convert you.

Posted by Teelie (Member # 280) on :

I know a few gay people who have religion, so yeah.

------------------
Ex-Admin at the TrekBBS.com

Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :

"A gay person doesn't want to be change to a hetrosexual person just like a hetrosexual person doesn't want to be change into a gay person."

Unfortunatly, a racist doesn't want to be changed to a non-racist either.

By and large, people don't want God to change them. They are the way they, either because they believe they are right, or are ignorant, or endless other possabilities that Psychology students can discuss for well over a week.

Bryce actually made a fair enough point. He believes that homosexuality is a sin, but one that will be forgiven. That's placing it on the same level as people who believe in sex before marriage, for example.

There are many Christians who will ignore certain rules, such as sex before marriage, or contraception, because they don't agree with them. I would say that this doesn't make them "less-Christian". God gave us free will. If he wanted us to believe him about everything all the time, he'd make us (probably by the smiting thing. He likes that). But he doesn't. So I belive that not only have we got a right to choose whether we believe him or not, but that we've also got a right to believe in him, and still disagree.

Oh, and about "It has been scientifically proven that women chemically bond in their minds to the men they have sex with."

I'll take Sol's "Okkkaaayyyy" and raise you a "huh?".

So, women who, er, get out a lot, basically have an entire office full of men's chemicals floating around in their head?

------------------
"A fully functioning, cybernetic, technologically advanced team of superheroes... and NOBODY'S got a flashlight?"
- Polly Ester; Samurai Pizza Cats

Posted by bryce (Member # 42) on :

I read it in Newsweek or Time last year.

And it's not men's chemicals it's chemicals they produce themselves.

To answer the question:
I don't see why religion cannot be compatible with a gay lifestyle. There are, however, a few (maybe many) religions that find the gay lifestyle uncompatible with it.

I must admit it would be nice if there was an example of a gay person in the Judo-Christian Bible, but in the time the Bible was composed it was not a social issue as it is today. I wonder if Greco-Roman mythology would have a more definate answer (for you, I think I have a definite answer) on the matter?

------------------
If you don't believe in what I say or the God I speak of I guess you'll just have to meet me so the Lord and I can convert you.

[This message has been edited by bryce (edited June 11, 2000).]

Posted by Baloo (Member # 5) on :

I only have anecdotal evidence to support the contention that females tend to bond to males they have sex with. However, I'm pretty sure my sister wouldn't lie to me about something like that.

Males tend to have one of two reactions to females they have sex with:

They bond, too.
They get a serious case of claustrophobia and want out of the relationship by whatever means proves most effective (chewing off a limb is not out of the question).

I've had both reactions. I suspect that the bonding thing happens with women, since it happens to men. The "flee at all costs" reaction may be a possibility for women, as well, but I've never heard of it.
</hijack>

~~Baloo

------------------
Beer lovers take note:
Stroh's spelled backwards is "shorts."

http://www.geocities.com/cyrano_jones.geo/

[This message has been edited by Baloo (edited June 12, 2000).]

Posted by Mikey T (Member # 144) on :

Wow, where did you people come from?

BTW, my paper is due June 19, so I have time still to read and read lots of opinions. So far, this has been helpful to my project, and it gives me an insight on how far times have changed. But I have a question to ask everyone: Does that mean that I should not come out of the closet to my family or to my Church? From what I've found out so far, doing so would prevent me from going to my Catholic Church and a deportation back to the Philippines.

Before anyone answers, I'll give some background info on my family life.
My father is gay, or so my mother says all the time. My mother is a devoted Catholic, and thinks that the Roman Catholic system is being underminded by the devil, the Jewish people, and by other outside forces. Basically my mother is paranoid and has entered her religious phase of her life. She thinks that anyone not Roman Catholic will go to hell.

I considered telling my family, but now I'm thinking doing so could complicate my life. It's bad enough I have to deal with being a gay Catholic and the fact that I'm not telling an important part of my life to my family.

------------------
Cigar Girl- "Would you like to check my figures?"

James Bond- "I'm sure that they are very well rounded..."

The World is Not Enough

Posted by Saiyanman Benjita (Member # 122) on :

bryce, how can you say the OT laws are outdated and not followed by Christians. That is where the Ten Commandments lay. It is also where we get our laws concerning everything. Every law in these new times have some basis in the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers (the very first Census) and Duteronomey. About the only thing not in those original books are that which pertain to things that we have invented since (such as car, phone, gas, train, guns, etc.). Elsewise, it's all based in those four books (murder, rape, burglary, idolizing (it's still illegal in some countries.), etc.) The reason that many people do not read these books is because they are chock full of information, not stories. Many people get bored reading these books (along with the Chronicles.). It doesn't make them any less important, and ask a preacher, they'll say these books are as important as any other book in the bible. There are also other sins quoted elsewhere in the bible (see- the Seven Deadly Sins). Just because these are not against the law, does that make them any less sinful? Does God not see them as a sin just because there is no law against lust, envy, gluttony, etc.? And will people see you as a good Christian (in this case) if you go to Church every Sunday, but are seen at the titty bar on Saturday night? They will see you as a hypocrite, and may rebuke the Christian church on your behalf. (Many people have rebuked the Catholic church because of the conduct of a few priests.) Prejudice? Maybe, but the best way to introduce someone to a religion is by acting like you follow that religion, well, religiously.

< return to antagonist mode >Okay, back to the pre-marital sex thing. So you consider the actual ceremony to be the marraige start, eh? If you go by the bible, the first marraige ceremony didn't happen for about 2 thousand years. And where in the bible state that pre-marital sex is sinful? If two people were engaged for a time, know they are to be married, and wish to know each other on a more personal basis, would that be considered sinful? They are to become life-long mates (if they aren't already). Do you really need the "legality" of it? You each consider yourselves already married, the piece of paper is just a formality so that you can claim each other on your taxes. And with all the rampant divorce in the world today (I have heard of a man who went through three wives in a year), the legality of the marraige is based on less than the spirituality of marraige. Would you not consider a loveless marraige used just to bring someone into the country to be sinful? (It's based on deceit) How about to decrease your taxes (I've heard of it, it's also based on deceit)? It seems that the legal document is just a formality these days, to a point where it's almost pointless. I'm getting married in two weeks, but we've been together for three years, engaged for two and a half years, and living together for two. Would you consider us sinners, or just a man and wife in spirit waiting for the legal signing of the papers. (Which is what we believe. The piece of paper is just that, our marraige is based on much more.)< /return to antagonist mode >

Oh by the way, it's Numbers 20:13, not 13:20. Sorry, It's been a while since I looked up the phrase.

Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :

Bub, you're in or you're out.

If you use an OT passage to define whether an action is a sin or not, then you must neccessarily use the proscribed punishment from the same text, since, by using the former passage, you commit yourself to believing in the 'correctness' of said text. One needs must follow the other, A leads to B and all, if one is to reason in a rational manner. Anything else is picking-and-choosing what to believe and what to discard, which is hypocracy.

(The short version): You can't say "Oh, I don't believe in anything in Leviticus except these three passages..."

(Digression)
*Leviticus. sounds like one of Megatron's pals.*
(/Digression)

If, on the other hand, you confine yourself to everything the NT says about it, you have:
1)JC's not saying anything about it at all.
2)The meandering ramblings of Paul, who himself is basing his mutterings on this topic on OT law rather than anything JC said. Of course, IMHO, he does this a lot anyway.

------------------
"Nobody knows this, but I'm scared all the time... of what I might do, if I ever let go." -- Michael Garibaldi

Posted by Saiyanman Benjita (Member # 122) on :

Not necessarily. JC has stated that the Old Testament laws are still effective (No specifics, but generally). However the price of these sins (In OT times, was a sacrifice of some sort, yours or animals), has been paid with his blood. This is the basis for the Christian religion. Obviously we follow him, because he did walk the walk, showing people it is possible to live without sinning. He also told sinners that they are forgiven and should sin no more. Obviously the forgiveness of the New Covenant (Jesus Christ) does not exclude the sins of the Old Covenant, but it forgives the sins with a different price (The repentance, and salvation through Jesus Christ).

As for the Jewish Nation, if they believe in the Torah (OT) and shun the NT, then they should be still abiding by the OT Rule.

It's like the real life punishment of sins. In Arab Nations, they used to cut off the hand of the thief, yet how many cases of that do you see today? It is still a sin, but the price has changed. Gunfights were rampant 150 years ago to settle disputes, but today, every dispute can be settled in a court and it is illegal to settle with a duel.

In this example, the OT Sins still apply, yet the NT covenant is used to pay for the price of the sins. This is why Christian Churches still display the Ten Commandments. Elsewise, what rules would we have?

Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :

But there ARE some rules which no longer apply, and some "abominations" which don't exist anymore, aren't there? For instance:

You can eat lobster, clam, and pork now.
You don't have to go out in the countryside and dig a latrine to go potty anymore.
You can wear 50% cotton, 50% polyester.
You don't have to be circumcised anymore. (And don't tell me that's not a big one, God almost croaked Moses because of it, in Exodus.)

I'm sure there are a few others, probably some more important ones, which I've forgotten to mention, but you get the gist.

------------------
"Nobody knows this, but I'm scared all the time... of what I might do, if I ever let go." -- Michael Garibaldi

Posted by Saiyanman Benjita (Member # 122) on :

The meat one is questionable... No one has said it's (for lack of better wording) "Kosher" for Christians to eat shellfish, or pork. It's because most of the christians were non-Jewish and were used to eating those foods. (As for Jews, it's still not Kosher to eat such foods, thus is still a sin, technically.)

The potty question is answered by our modern plumbing. We can go potty, and the pipes will take our unclean waste away from our home. Obviously this is to protect our home from unclean wastes (diseases and such)

50%cotton50%polyesther, well, if we are sinning (as I said before, there is no passage that rebukes the original statute), well, than we are all truly sinners.

As for the circumcision question, most Christian Males are still circumcised in the first week of their life. I think the numbers are in the high 80%-mid90% range. So it seems the standard still stands, though the church is always open to new members, and uncircumcised males are still allowed to repent and live through Jesus Christ. However, the Church will not cast someone out because they are not circumcised (Of course, they don't check every male anymore- possible sexual abuse charges just don't look good for priests :P)

The Bible never specifically states that these are not sins anymore, so if you devoutly believe in the Bible, you may still consider these sins. And yes, I do know some people who still consider these to be sins (Mostly Jewish, some Christians.)

Posted by bryce (Member # 42) on :

Well, considering I let this go for 24 hours and just now came back I really don't have a place to start. Benjy overreacted to my statements or maybe I wasn't clear enough for a discussion involving people that don't know everything I believe, I dunno.

First, the sins have never changed just the punishment. Levi priests had to sacrifice for themselves and everyone else. Jesus just sacrificed for us, just once, because He was perfect.
II Cor. 5:21 Maybe that will help you understand? All of God's laws were meant for the benefit of His people, they were being attacked spiritually. Jesus came to teach the Jews, and the Holy Spirit came to protect those Jews (Christians) who believed in Christ. Christ's sacrifice with the protection of the Spirit prevents God's people from being attacked. You could think of it like God's people received a better insurance plan with Christianity and the New Testament.

Michael, considering your family I would not come out. I have no clue, of course, how hard that maybe but I wouldn't strain your relationship with your mother, someday she maybe all you have.

By the way, I am taking a Torah class in the Fall.

------------------
If you don't believe in what I say or the God I speak of I guess you'll just have to meet me so the Lord and I can convert you.

Posted by Saiyanman Benjita (Member # 122) on :

Sorry, It seemed like you were saying something else. I just wanted to clarify what I thought you were saying. It's been a while since I've been in a religious discussion (and it feels quite refreshing to, actually) So If I misquote you, or take your point differently, just smack me and clarify.

Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :

80-90% of Christians certainly aren't cirumcised. At least, not over here. During one of those pub conversations that you regret later, someone asked. out of the 8 of us, 4 had been circumcised. And all 4 of us were at least 5 when we had it done. And it was all for medical reasons.

(That's choosing 8 Catholics BTW. I have asked around amoungst other Christians, and found very few who were circumcised at birth. I did get hit a few times though for asking. Probably not best to walk up to people in McDonalds and say "so, you had the old snip snip then?").

------------------
"A fully functioning, cybernetic, technologically advanced team of superheroes... and NOBODY'S got a flashlight?"
- Polly Ester; Samurai Pizza Cats