quote:so the fact that you called it ugly and cruel that I don't think tolerance and acceptance of homosexuality should be furthered just reinforces my and Card's point that political correctness and tolerance are rampant in this country
Again, I'll be blunt: tolerance running rampant -- or as rampant as tolerance can run; I imagine it involves a lot of uncomfortable group hugs -- is among the least of America's problems.
You don't believe homosexuals should be permitted to raise children. On this board alone, there are at least two same-sex couples raising children and, IMO, doing a decent job of it. You don't think homosexuality should be tolerated; on this board alone, there are at least eight practicing homosexuals and/or bisexuals. So what form would your intolerance take? Would you post in every thread they start about their families, or how much they love their SOs, to tell them you disapprove? Would you shut them out, give them the silent treatment? Would you demand that the ones with children get rid of their children, for their sakes? Or would you just quietly disapprove of their decision to sleep with someone you consider unsuitable, but otherwise treat them like any other human being?
If the latter, congratulations! You're tolerant and you didn't even know it! The only question left is to determine whether you're tolerant just because you're too embarrassed to be vocal about your disapproval, or because you really genuinely believe that decent people can be permitted to make mistakes without requiring your constant supervision and correction.
And if the latter, again, welcome to the club! Most decent people feel that way. Which is why gay marriage is pretty much inevitable.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Romans 1………. 26For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.
1 Corinthians 6………. 9Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God?Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. 1 Timothy 1…….. 9realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers 10and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching, 11according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted.
Posts: 56 | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged |
I have to ask: do you believe that we should, in our laws and in our relationships with non-Christians, attempt to legislate "righteousness" as defined by a given interpretation of the Bible?
Look again at the specific questions I asked you in my post above. There are homosexuals raising children on this forum. How would you treat them, if you knew who they were?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I never said gay people could not do a good job of rasing children and in some cases a better job of raising them than some heterosexuals and I never said they couldn't stay married longer than many heterosexuals....in many cases, sadly enough, it is probably true.....I did say I don't think the idea that homosexuality is an acceptable lifestyle should be furthered and impressed on kids growing up, because it is an immoral lifestule and a sinful one, as posted above....and as posted earlier, people take such comments and try to make me - or someone else who speaks about the Bible and the beliefs that what It says is Truth - into the bad guy..... Again, I apologize if my comments have been taken as mean-spirited....I want to just state the Biblical viewpoint on here and my belief that if gay marriage does come about, it just furthers the idea that homosexuality is OK, and I don't believe that it is, and neither should any Christian.....
Posts: 56 | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:I never said gay people could not do a good job of rasing children and in some cases a better job of raising them than some heterosexuals...
You said the following: "I mean I absolutely do NOT think they should be able to raise children..." Why do you not think that homosexuals should be able to raise children, if you think they're capable of doing a decent job at it?
quote:I did say I don't think the idea that homosexuality is an acceptable lifestyle should be furthered and impressed on kids growing up, because it is an immoral lifestule and a sinful one...
Yes, this is your opinion. And you're welcome to teach your own children that homosexual behavior is immoral and sinful. There are people who do not share your opinion on what is moral or sinful, however, and your children are going to grow up in a world where what you tell them is not going to always match what the rest of the world tells them. That's going to happen a hundred thousand times, on a hundred thousand issues; homosexuality's just one thing that you're going to disagree with somebody about. (As an example: not every Christian you meet is going to accept your interpretation of the Bible, or accept your description of the Christian viewpoint.)
There are healthy ways to handle this sort of disagreement. Teach your children those, too, and you'll be teaching them something truly worthwhile.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
We never should have printed Scripture in the vernacular...
volsamm,
For starters, the Apostles were not God. Inspired is not the same thing as perfect. Jesus (as far as we know) had nothing to say on the subject.
It might be helpful for you to understand the context in which Paul was writing. Remember, too, that Paul expected the world to end within his lifetime. Bear in mind also that Paul much prefered that no one have sex at all - even married people. The early church was heavily influenced by the Stoics whose philosophy divided spirit from the physical/emotional/sensory. To the people influenced by this philosophy, one needed to deny the physical as much as possible to focus on the spirit. You might have noticed that Paul writes a lot about focusing on the spirit.
He was also working hard to reconcile Christians who were from the Jewish tradition (which prohibits homosexuality) with Gentiles. The Greek practice of homosexuality, in addition to being physical/pleasure, would have made this reconciliation much more difficult.
Understanding at least a little context is going to be helpful to you if you are going to be arguing Scripture.
Also "effeminate" is not usually how that passage from 1 Cor is translated. What translation are you using?
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
Look again at the specific questions I asked you in my post above. There are homosexuals raising children on this forum. How would you treat them, if you knew who they were? [/QB][/QUOTE] ---------------------------------
9I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people;
10I did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the world.
11But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler--not even to eat with such a one.
12For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church?
13But those who are outside, God judges. REMOVE THE WICKED MAN FROM AMONG YOURSELVES.
---------------------------
So I guess my answer would be... are they a brother/sister in Christ? If so, I would need to try and talk to them about sin, and if they didn't change their lifestyle, then I would be obligated to not "keep company" with them as the Bible says.....but if they are not a brother/sister in Christ, the Bible tells me differently.........
Posts: 56 | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
sorry about the CAPS at the end of the last post....I was copying and pasting from a Bible website and that was the format...not my doing...I apologize
Posts: 56 | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
kmbboots..... ...It is the New American Standard Bible, which to my understanding is one of the most closely translated versions.........my NKJV also says homosexuals in 1 Cor 6 though.......
I guess it comes down to your belief in whether the Scriptures are inspired by God or not....I believe they are.....
----------------- From 2 Peter 3.... 15and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you,
16as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction. ----------- Here Peter calls Paul's Letters Scriptures.......
From 2 Peter 1......... 19So we have the prophetic word made more sure, to which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts.
20But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation,
21for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.
---------- And this is Peter talking, to whom Jesus gave the keys of the Kingdom....From Matthew 16:
17And Jesus said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.
18"I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it.
19"I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven." -------- Jesus said whatever Peter bound or loosed on Earth shall have already been bound or loosed in Heaven.........sounds inspired to me.........
---------- And as far as Jesus' direct teachings....He did speak of marriage in Matthew 19....and in verse 4, He mentions that God made them male and female and He mentions wives....which is feminine....
Posts: 56 | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged |
....Again, I don't want to cause trouble - although when you start discussing sensitive issues such as these, people get upset.... I apologize if I have offended anyone in my tone or spirit, but I do not apologize for the content of what I have said....I believe it to be the truth, and I believe more people should stand up for it..... And yes, Tom....I do understand that there gonna be many who disagree with me....it is just my hope that whoever is right or wrong, we learn to see it God's Way........
Posts: 56 | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wasn't referring to the word "homosexual" I was refering to "effeminate" - usually I have seen that translated as "male prostitute."
I do believe that Scripture is inspired. That is not the same thing as believing that the apostles always got it right* or believing that one can lift Scripture out of its cultural context and apply it without some understanding. Paul was writing for a specific audience in a specific time and place.
*clearly they didn't. If they did, how could they have disagreed so often?
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
1. When you registered, you agreed to certain Terms of Service. These constitute both a legal and ethical contract. It might be wise to go back and review them, in particular, this: "You also agree that you will not use this forum to try to convert people to your own religious beliefs, or to disparage others for their own religious beliefs."
Now, quoting references in a debate is not the same thing as prosetylization or evangelism, but extensive block quoting without primary commentary, or with just frippery dressing of a few words, can be problematic for the TOS. Tone is also an issue. Expressing differing beliefs in an honest and genuinely respectful way is not a problem, but how you go about doing it may be in violation of your agreement with the operators of the site.
I am "whistling" your recent posts for review by the moderator, not to make you feel bad, but in order to get some balanced objective input from someone who does his job so well. He might find it appropriate to clarify the responsibilities we all share to all of us, as I might be wrong in assessing that you are walking close to some lines.
Regardless, I recommend you review the TOS you agreed to upon registration. To do so, log out and press the link to "register" again, and immediately you will be taken back to your original contract.
2. It is easy to edit one's posts if they do not come out as intended; i.e., you do not need to post separately an apology about unintended block use of capitals, as you can go back and change that if it is not what you intended. If you have trouble doing this, or figuring out the "quote" function, or anything else regarding how to use a forum, I daresay that there are many here who would be delighted to be of assistance.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
ClaudiaTherese....... I apologize to you and anyone if I violated the TOS...I really do feel bad if I did; I am not trying to be patronizing or anything....I was not aware of the religious bit on the TOS; I know I agreed to them, but I was not aware of that part...sorry...... It's just difficult for me to discuss what I view as a religious/spiritual issue without using the Bible.... ....and as far as my tone....I thought that was already addressed; I apologized if mine was offensive.... actually I felt that other's tone was worse than mine...but then again, that's the thing about posting in a forum...you can't interpret someone's tone....I didn't feel that mine was beligerant though.....
Posts: 56 | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
OK....I just looked over the TOS, and I didn't see any mention of religious material/religion at all.......maybe I missed it.... but if it isn't there, I didn't violate the TOS, did I?....
Posts: 56 | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
volssam, I don't think that your tone has been out of line*. Bear in mind, though, that you will be associating with all manner of folk here and it seemed from your posts as if that were only possible, according to the passages you quoted, if your association included trying to convert them to what you consider acceptable behaviour.
ETA: * I take that back. Actually, I do think your tone has been out of line. For goodness sake, you indicated your disappointment with us almost immediately on this thread! I think though, that it is a function of ignorance rather than malice.
posted
Actually, I am honestly surprised that OSC's official site would have that clause in there....
....I know that he is a religious man.... ...And I am not wanting to bully anybody with my comments...I guess I should be aware that some would take it that way....I am sorry about that...
Posts: 56 | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was wanting a discussion...as I have discussed similar issues on other sites....I guess I didn't see a problem...although I was not aware of the whole TOS thing.....please don't hate me.......
Posts: 56 | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Stop groveling. If you will read the many, many other thread, you will see that it is (sometimes) possible to have a positive discussion on the topic. You might want to consider, though, whether that counts as associating.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:if they are not a brother/sister in Christ, the Bible tells me differently
Millions of the people in this country are not Christian. Is it your belief that those people should be able to marry individuals of the same sex?
By the way, I definitely don't hate you. But I want you to look closely at what you just wrote here:
quote:I am honestly surprised that OSC's official site would have that clause in there....
....I know that he is a religious man....
Think about what you're saying for a moment. You know he is a religious man; therefore you assume that he shares your opinion. This is a very dangerous assumption.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
I was talking about the point that his site would exclude trying to talk about/convert people to religious ideas.....
I didn't mean that he agrees with me on everything....trust me, I am positive he doesn't agree with me on everything......
I am sorry you took it that way....this is why it's difficult to discuss things on a forum; people take things the wrong way....not trying to blame you; it's easy to do....
Posts: 56 | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
and you told me to stop grovelling.... I can hardly help it....if you only knew me...you see I have something called OCD, and I start obssessing over things, and one of those things that I obssess over is when I am afraid that I have sinned....which is why I kept apologizing for my tone and then when I unknowingly violated my TOS....I didn't want anyone to think that I had lied....b/c I consider myself an honest person who tries to do what God wants.....anyways, see here I go again; I try to over-explain myself...I know it's bothersome; you can ask my wife.......haha
Posts: 56 | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
responding to Tom's earlier post....no that is not my belief, but I mean...obviously I can't control people's actions....we were made with free will, thankfully, and it's up to each person how they live their life to a certain extent....as far as people in the world, it is my responsibility as I see it to try to tell others about the Bible (except apparently on this site from now on ) and it is up to them whether to accept it or not; I won't hate them for not agreeing with me and deciding to live their life that way; it's up to them....but as far as marriage, I believe it should be between a man and a woman.....I'm not going to go through many of my reasons again....as I don't want to get in trouble and /or upset my OCD-ness....
Posts: 56 | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thank you Tom and kmb for discussing stuff with me....it's good to talk about important issues....and if everyone saw things the same way ....my way---haha......what fun would that be? j/k
Posts: 56 | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by volssam: ....as far as people in the world, it is my responsibility as I see it to try to tell others about the Bible (except apparently on this site from now on ) ....
I don't think you understand. It is permitted to discuss the Christian Bible, to reference it, and to acknowledge your own commitment to its principles. Same for any other holy text, so long as it is done appropriately. Same for any secular text, too, by the way, and with the same restrictions.
The crux is this (as I see it): this site is akin to a dinner party. It is a place for people of all faiths and backgrounds, even all ages, to get together and spend enjoyable, hopefully insightful and scintillatingly witty ( ) time together as guests. As guests, though, we commit in essence to "Speak with passion, and listen with respect."
Just as one might refer to religious matters or debate a point of interest with someone one disagrees with at a lively, engaging dinner party, so you can here. It is even encouraged, if not expected. But one wouldn't use one's host's dinner table as a specific podium from which to convert other guests to one's own religion -- or chastise them for not agreeing! -- especially not aggressively so.
There is a difference. It may be hard for some to see, but it is there, and it is taken seriously. If the difference is not apparent to you, I daresay we are not likely to be able to explain it in a way understandable to you. But some people can try, or maybe our moderator can clarify (even if you are nowhere near that line, or if you have been, too).
OSC operates multiple sites. I know of this one, loosely characterized as his "living room," but also a forum geared directly toward people of the Church of Latter-Day Saints, and one that is specifically geared to political discussion (The Ornery American).
The former is a site I would also like to participate in, as I am interested in many religious matters (and the ideas of my LDS friends in particular), but since registration at that site requires a pledge of commitment to the principles of the LDS Church, I do not. Like you, I take my commitments seriously, and so I could not register there. I am not LDS. But if you are, you might find it a place you find most amenable. I don't think we are supposed to link directly there, but a Google search on "Nauvoo Forum" would take you there. [Papa Janitor, please edit this as appropriate if needed.]
But whether or not you explore his other sites, you remain welcome here, I am sure. Just recall that this is a very diverse place, and it is set up to be open to a broad swath of people: the "guests" of our "host." You can disagree with other guests, you can talk about matters that are controversial and dear to your heart.
However, "speak with passion, and listen with respect." Treat your fellow posters as welcomed guests, too, and do honor to our esteemed host in that way as well.
My apologies that we have participated in your distress. Regardless of fault, that is a regrettable occurrence.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ClaudiaTherese: I don't think we are supposed to link directly there, but a Google search on "Nauvoo Forum" would take you there. (Papa Janitor, please edit this as appropriate, if needed.)
This may or may not have changed as policy. If you go to hatrack.com there is an image link at the top that leads to this http://www.orsonscottcard.com/ which provides the desired link.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks Claudia Therese....I would like to keep posting in forums on this site....and I want to discuss religious issues and even use scripture. Hopefully, I can try to think about whether I am just using it as a reference or trying to convert others in the future.... ...Do you think I crossed the line earlier....as I said I don't think my tone was a problem...but maybe my intent....maybe....???? ...Anyway, I hope noone will shun me in the future. I do normally like to discuss issues, even though it almost always comes back to the Bible for me....... ...Hatrack is one of my fave sites to come to forums on.....and I hope to talk with many of you, if not all of you, in the future....OSC rocks!
Posts: 56 | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry...another post....not that this needs clarifying necessarily....but I am a very conservative person (not an extremist, I don't think), both in political and religious views....but I don't feel like I am a rigid non-compassionate person that people with strict beliefs seem to often get the reputation of being....
Posts: 56 | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am not interested in commenting directly on your behavior myself. I am interested in drawing your eye to a potential conflict, noting it for moderation, and providing you with resources.
Again, welcome to Hatrack. Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
What are you trying to convey with your frequent use of ellipses? I've taken one of your posts and changed them all to single periods (or deleted them if at the beginning of the line):
quote:Thanks Claudia Therese. I would like to keep posting in forums on this site. and I want to discuss religious issues and even use scripture. Hopefully, I can try to think about whether I am just using it as a reference or trying to convert others in the future.
Do you think I crossed the line earlier. as I said I don't think my tone was a problem. but maybe my intent. maybe. ????
Anyway, I hope noone will shun me in the future. I do normally like to discuss issues, even though it almost always comes back to the Bible for me.
Hatrack is one of my fave sites to come to forums on. and I hope to talk with many of you, if not all of you, in the future. OSC rocks!
I also double-spaced the paragraphs just for fun.
That's a decently-written post - a fact that surprised me after I removed the ellipses. Before I did that, my mind kept trying to come up with what words you had removed or adding terribly long pauses, neither of which helped me to understand your post. One simple change of removing all ellipses (other than in quotes from which you have excluded words) would, at least in my opinion, dramatically improve the comprehensibility and ease of reading of your posts.
quote:Originally posted by volssam: What do you mean when you keep saying associating kmb?
quote: 11But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler--not even to eat with such a one.
You quoted that. I was wondering how literally you take it. I would consider conversing on the internet as "associating". You may not.
volssam, I don't think that you need to keep apologizing. This is tricky, but, to me, the aspect of your posts that offends is not your intention, but the underlying assumptions. You are probably a very nice, humble person. Your assumption that all religious people share your opinion on things, your disappointment that people and ideas that don't conform to your ideas are present on this site , your belief that tolerance of people and ideas that don't harm you is a bad thing - all these, I find troublesome. This is a diverse place and you might want to keep in mind that, when you rail about "those people" you are railing at many of us.
While it is not my place to "convert" you to my version of Christianity, I do feel free to argue the merits with you.
Does that make sense?
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
CT, I do thank you for bringing this to my attention (sorry I was unavailable much of today).
Volssam, I also welcome you to Hatrack. Most of what I would say has been covered through the conversation, but I thought I'd poke my head in anyway. There's nothing in the terms of service (reviewable here if you feel like it) that says you can't use the Bible (or anything else) as your reason for a belief. There isn't anything saying that anyone else has to consider your reasoning authoritative or logical or compelling, either.
There's a fine line somewhere between explaining your belief with a religious basis, trying to convince another to switch to your belief which is based on religion, and trying to convince someone to convert to your religion (I use "convince" in a well-meaning rather than malicious manner here). Not always clear where that line is, but I don't think you've necessarily (or certainly intentionally) crossed it. I just ask that you endeavor to use your judgment to stay on the indicated side of that line, and if/when my judgment differs significantly from mine, I'll mention it.
As to tone, this seems to be regularly one of the most heated topics we ever have at Hatrack. Because it's so important to so many people, the tensions often get a little higher than the average. But precisely because so many people consider it vitally important, I try not to squelch conversation on it out of devotion to keeping order -- I just encourage people to keep it reasonable. If anything, I think I'm too lax (though you'll find people on nearly every point of the spectrum on that subject, too).
I'm not sure I have anything else I consider of crucial importance to say here, though I occasionally forget my original point. If you have any questions feel free to ask. And although I'm officially "the moderator," Hatrack is fairly self-moderating most times, so a good suggestion is a good suggestion whether it's from me or not. And if it's from ClaudiaTherese, it's probably even better.
posted
Thanks PJ -Dagonee: Are you talking about my use of periods? like this .............. Sorry, that is just the way I write in forums and even on my text messages; someone has asked me about it before. I don't know that there is a good answer; it's just the way I write; I guess maybe I feel that it kinda separates my thoughts or something, and now it is a habit. I am trying to refrain from it right now; it's kinda hard.
-Tom: I am a very religious person, and I guess it always comes back to the Bible for me b/c I feel that is what our morals and ethics should be governed by, and that somewhere in the past, we - as humans have always done - have diverted from it for some reason and have started to trust in our own logic and reasoning above God's and decided what is right in our own eyes and what seems fair in our own eyes and so on. And I guess I have been writing on here about my relihious view on things, but I wish everyone could believe in the Bible and try to live as closely by it as they can, but I know this is America (or maybe other countries???) and that people are free to choose how to live their lives (which is a great thing); but for me, it always comes back to the Bible b/c it is how I view I should live and what I will be judged by in the end.
-kmb: Oh, I see; I was confused for a while when you kept saying associating. I suppose it could be considered associating by talking on a forum to others. This is a very complicated issue (We call it disfellowshipping) in the Church I attend and one that is not used very often. It comes from the New Testament (some of it from the verses above where it talks about not keeping company with a brother who is immoral) and it talks about going to a brother that is sinned and trying to correct their error and trying again with more people, but if they refuse to change their lifestyle, then they are to be "disfelowshipped" until they decide to repent and come back to the Lord. And when I mention Brother/ Sister in Christ, I am talking about a member of the Church - the Church being the one of which I am a member, the one we believe was started on the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2. ....(Sorry Dagonee - I did well for a while there ) As far as believing all religious people share my ideas, as I mentioned earlier about Card, trust me, I know that most people do not; even a lot of people that go to the same Church with me do not agree with me on some things. Our motto in the Church is to speak where the Bible speaks and be silent where the Bible is silent - meaning if the Bible tells us this is right and that is wrong; that is what we think is right and wrong; and if the Bible doesn't speak as to whether something is right or wrong, it's not up to us to do it (for example - in the New Testament, when speaking of worship, it tells us to sing and it never mentions using musical instruments to worship, so we sing a capella in our worship services ---- things like that). Anyways, I know there are a lot of people who do not agree with me on some of my views. There are some (like you talked about earlier) that think some issues were not meant for us in our culture and that the Bible - at least not all of it - is inspired. I believe it is inspired and I believe that God is unchanging and that even if we as a society change our cultural or collective views on what is right and wrong, He does not. So that is where we run into disagreements, I suppose.
Posts: 56 | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
And when it says a brother who is immoral - I am not saying just homosexuals; I believe it is talking about anybody who decides to live in a continually sinning lifestyle - such as adultery, someone who is a drunkard, even someone who uses bad language all the time, etc... Basically, anyone who chooses to defy God's Word and decide to live contrary to it in their lifestyle. Does that make sense? Because we all sin and we all have our own struggles, but I believe that if we are trying to live as closely to God's Word as possible and that if we repent and try to do better when we find that we have sinned and we are living according to God's Will, then grace takes care of the rest, and without that grace, I think we'd all be in trouble.
Posts: 56 | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Being a "Drunkard" is not exactly a moral issue. Most folks become alcoholics as a result of trauma.
But, I never understand HOW homosexuality can be considered immoral when there are things so much worse. Focus on the Family doesn't take out a 20,000 dollar ad announcing that child abusers can change, so why do they focus on homosexuality? Two people of the same sex being together? It really doesn't matter and it's not destroying society nearly as much as disfunctional families do.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
volssam, let me explain about my view of the Bible. It is a view that is not uncommon among Christians.
In my faith, the Bible is one way that we understand God. We also use reason, experience, tradition, prayer, and of course, the Holy Spirit. The Bible is indeed inspired, but it is a collection of many different books and letters, histories and law and poetry written by different people at different times for different purposes. To understand it, we need to understand the context. We need to understand the literature conventions employed by the writers. It is not as simple as "the Bible says". We can't understand Scripture the way we would a modern newspaper or history book. This is why we have more than one Gospel and why they don't all agree in the particulars. They were written many years after the events they record.
I tell you this so that you are aware that the majority of Christians don't necessarily share your view of how the Scripture should be understood.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Are you talking about my use of periods? like this ..............
Exactly.
quote:I am trying to refrain from it right now; it's kinda hard.
As a reader, I appreciate that. The posts you have made with no/limited ellipses have been much easier to read. Thank you for taking that into account.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
This reminds me of a friend on another forum, who ends every sentence with ellipses.... It does make it hard to read, but I've never figured out how to say anything about it without hurting them - good job Dag!
Now I find them creeping into my own writing ... and I hate it!
posted
-Dagonee: you are welcome. - Synesthesia and Threads: I will try to answer you in the same paragraph. The Bible does say that those who practice homosexuality AND those practice drunkenness, along with other things such as adultery, fornication, idolatry, hatred, thieves, and others will NOT inherit the kingdom of God(Heaven); so I guess I just consider people who do things contrary to the Bible immoral. I am sure that there are some people who drink a lot who would never rationally do many of the things that we as a society agree are immoral, but I guess I think the very act of drunkenness or at least living a lifestyle in such a manner is immoral. And homosexuality, as I said, is included in the list of those who, according to the Bible, will not enter the kingdom of God. And I have also never understood how a lot of people can think it is a moral or natural lifestyle. I agree Synesthesia that there are other things that are bad as well, child abuse being one obvious one, but that doesn't mean another issue should be ignored. And maybe (I don't know) they (Focus on the Family and other groups) see that society as a whole can and should and in many cases do carry the banner against child abuse b/c everybody I would think would understand that it is wrong and immoral to abuse a child. And so maybe they use their resources to carry the banner against an issue they see as a threat to the moral fiber of our country, a moral fiber that has already taken a beating in this country - drunkenness, fornication, language, divorce, violent crimes, etc... -kmb: I understand I guess what you are saying but I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I do agree with you that the Old Testament is there for our learning. The N.T. says so. I don't think the O.T. is there to govern our lives the way it did the Jews. I believe we ARE to live by the N.T. and its teachings, both the ones by Jesus and the ones by the inspred writers of the N.T. But if you don't believe the same things, I don't guess you'll agree with my view on things. But whether someone looks at the O.T. or the N.T., I think it is clear that, according to the Bible, God does not condone homosexuality, and as such, would not condone gay marriage, which is the original issue of this thread. And I am sure there are many people who would agree with you about the Bible, that some issues are outdated, but I will say again, culture and society and people may change, but I don't believe God does, and in the book of Hebrews it says that Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever. Also, it says in the book of Proverbs: Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding; In all your ways acknowledge Him. And He shall direct your paths. Do not be wise in your own eyes; Fear the Lord and depart from evil. This is where I think we as a society and we as humans so often go wrong. We try to impose our undertsanding and presume to be able to think for God (i.e. "that was just for that culture; times are different now" or "surely I won't go to hell for that" or "surely God understands this" or "if God would send me to hell for this, then I don't want to serve that kind of God") instead of just taking God at His Word and living how He says to live. That is my view. And I know it is probably not a popular view in some people's eyes, but I think it is just too convenient to live how we want and try to conform the Bible to our lives instead of the other way around. And I know I fail in some aspects sometimes, but as I said, I believe that as long as we try our best, and repent when needed, grace takes care of the rest.
Posts: 56 | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
volssam, I believe that that while God is eternal, our human understanding of God can increase. Just as we understand the world better through gains in science and knowledge, we can also grow in our understadning of God. While there are great stores of wisdom in Scripture, we can go beyond the understanding of the men of the first century and our children can go even further.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:people are free to choose how to live their lives (which is a great thing)
Why do you think people being free to choose how to live their lives is a great thing? There's nothing in the Bible that suggests this, as far as I can tell.
quote:This is where I think we as a society and we as humans so often go wrong. We try to impose our undertsanding...
For what it's worth, this particular attitude is what I consider the single most dangerous by-product of a religious worldview. It's very difficult to live this way, and also potentially very harmful to people who don't share the same premises. (As an example, look at your stated belief above: that it's good for people to be free to choose how to live, even if that leads them into what you consider immorality. Why do you feel that way? Is there a Biblical reason?)
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:This is where I think we as a society and we as humans so often go wrong. We try to impose our understanding...
For what it's worth, this particular attitude is what I consider the single most dangerous by-product of a religious worldview.
Erm...some religious worldviews.
volssam, as much as people may try to live by a literal reading of the bible, it is simply not possible to do this without adding our own understanding and interpretation. Even literalists are not absolutely literal. here is a classic example. Do you own more than one coat? What about jackets? Do they count a coats? Can we own a jacket and a coat without giving one away. What about winter coats and raincoats? Does this only apply to "coats" as they existed during the time of Jesus? Does it mean "tunic"? Or does it mean that, when we have more than we need, we should be charitable?
Even to answer these questions, we have to use our own judgment and understanding.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
The way I look at it, "I think hard about what's right and wrong based on what I see in the world around me" is not a religious worldview.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
How about "I think hard about what's right and wrong based on what I see in the world around me, the wisdom of others past and present, and what knowledge I gain from 'listening' to the Holy Spirit"? I would think that would count as a religious viewpoint, yet still leaves room for people to come to other conclusions about what is right.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
) and it is up to them whether to accept it or not; I won't hate them for not agreeing with me and deciding to live their life that way; it's up to them....but as far as marriage, I believe it should be between a man and a woman.....I'm not going to go through many of my reasons again....as I don't want to get in trouble and /or upset my OCD-ness....
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
