Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Well everyone has buttocks after all.

Testify wrote:
Not in the new testament. It's not mentioned once.

Hmm you mean like here..

1 Corinthians 6:9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men (NIV)

or here

Romans 1:26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error. (NIV)

Two quick examples and that's hardly "It's not mentioned once"

GG




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Melissia wrote:Ah yes, the "word of god", the same word that has been edited, re-edited, edited from the re-edit of the edited re-edited edit of the re-edit of the edited edit from the original edit after it was re-edited a few times over from the original, with edits used for political gain by those who were making them.

This view is typical of someone who is ignorant of how the Bible was compiled and organized.

While it is true that some translation error crept in...not one major Christian doctrine is effected. Most of the errors were things like typos and the sort. (even Bart Ehrman admits this) Any textual variants are heavily documented and are noted in modern translations.

GG

generalgrog wrote:

Testify wrote:
Not in the new testament. It's not mentioned once.

Hmm you mean like here..

1 Corinthians 6:9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men (NIV)

or here

Romans 1:26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error. (NIV)

Two quick examples and that's hardly "It's not mentioned once"

GG

Do they have a "Choose your own adventure" version?

Damn I was under the impression Corinthians wasn't considered canon.

ShumaGorath wrote: I think the idea of equality from the standpoint of an inherent national ideology is a bit silly. America has never been about equality. Americans have, several times throughout history, fought or marched for increased personal equality that saw this country for a time become arguably the most liberally free country on earth. We're certainly not that right now and nothing about the foundation of this country has really pushed an equality agenda. The constitution and bill of rights are certainly nice sentiments but them come from a time of massive slave trade and repression of gays foreigners and women, for hundreds of years they served to maintain a system built on unequal equality. Equality in America has always been a bizzare political football, no dominant political force has ever pushed strongly for actual equality. They've just been influenced by newly voiced masses (as is happening now).

"Equality" like "Freedom" seems to be thrown around so much as to lose all meaning, another pointless slogan. Obviously people are never going to be equal. Is equality before the law enough? Equality of opportunity? In that case should we abolish private schools? Material advancement in society, as ever, is mostly about networking and connections so people born into rich families have a ton of intrinsic advantages. Talking about how great a country is because of its equality seems a little bit pointless except in the most basic sense (I.E. comparing North Korea to a Western state). For any meaningful conversation to take place you have to get into specifics about what kind of equality is important, which rights are actually important, not just go on about "equality" in a general sense.

The Constitution and Bill of Rights come from an era heavily influenced by the thinkers of the french enlightenment (Who disparaged slavery and repression in general). But of course after the French Revolution there was in America like everywhere else a huge reaction against enlightenment thought so that the Constitution doesn't really represent what America became. It gets twisted and misread into being whatever people want it to be of course (just watch Fox News) but its original intent has nothing to do with what America is now.

"President Obama has not given us the courtesy of a reply to discuss his support of same-sex marriage, and is taking the black vote for granted," Rev. William Owens, president of the Coalition of African American Pastors, said in a statement. He said the campaign will urge black pastors and other black voters to "withdraw their support" of the president.

"We will see that the black community is informed that the president is taking them for granted while pandering to the gay community," he said.

This sort of thing just baffles me. After all the abuse the Black community in the United States has suffered some of these pastors are just all too eager to turn around and deny someone else's right to live their life without prejudice. For a country supposedly all about freedom that freedom sure seems to be applied very selectively.

CT GAMER wrote:

Brother Heinrich wrote:as a thinking and reasoning human being

This is what serperates you from the homophobes...

Good for them, if they actually put their money where their mouth is.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Testify wrote:

Melissia wrote:Ah yes, the "word of god", the same word that has been edited, re-edited, edited from the re-edit of the edited re-edited edit of the re-edit of the edited edit from the original edit after it was re-edited a few times over from the original, with edits used for political gain by those who were making them.

As opposed to literalist world view which is consistently wrong, of course.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Polonius wrote:While the bible doesn't make nearly as big a deal of homosexuality as some people think, it's pretty well documented, that at best, the writers of the various books weren't big fans.

Not in the new testament. It's not mentioned once.

Exactly. Or to use your moniker...TESTIFY!

Frazzled wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

Brother Heinrich wrote:as a thinking and reasoning human being

This is what serperates you from the homophobes...

Good for them, if they actually put their money where their mouth is.

Must. . . resist. . .

More importantly,

Jihadin wrote:Enoch Fuzz

is a most badass name.

Huh, and if you actually talk to any biblical scholars, read their wriings or listen to them speak they will tell you it has been editted.

Every single one I have ever heard and read will tell you that the Bible most certainly has been mistranslated severely to match the views of the Roman Catholic Church. So much so that they changed the entire meaning of portions of the text, edited the heck out of it, and excluded a lot of Biblical books.

The Bible as most of you know it is inaccurate and incomplete at best. There are some good compendiums, and some printings that will show you what the meanings of words were in Hebrew historically, and show you a much closer to original meaning of the book.

Goodluck in your further quest for spiritual enlightenment and understanding.

generalgrog wrote:Two quick examples and that's hardly "It's not mentioned once"

You've mentioned two examples, and implied there's loads more. That's really, really disingenuous of you, because there's three instances throughout the whole of the New Testament, and it's a really big book.

I mean, consider how many times the book mentions charity, or compassion for your fellow man, and then think about the whopping, great big total of three times that homosexuality is mentioned. And then think about the silence with which so many church groups treat efforts to improve the lives of the poor, compared to the immense amount of noise you'll hear whenever anyone suggest gay people should be granted the same right to marry that anyone else has. It's almost as if they'd picked out the one thing they like to condemn in others, and ignored all the stuff in there imploring them to be better people.

And that's without looking at exactly what early Bible said, as the original Greek word is very unusual, not at all like words used to describe homosexuality at the time, and is only seen in other writing as describing pederasty or sodomising a woman. That's not to say it definitely isn't a reference to any kind of homosexual behaviour, it could well be. It's just that we're talking about archaic Greek texts, and they're really, really open to interpretation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Shadowseer_Kim wrote:Every single one I have ever heard and read will tell you that the Bible most certainly has been mistranslated severely to match the views of the Roman Catholic Church.

Uh, a lot of groups other than Roman Catholic Church have looked to publish their own bible, and into every one of those, either deliberately or not, some kind of interpretation funniness has gone on. I mean, King James Bible, anyone?

Polonius wrote:While the bible doesn't make nearly as big a deal of homosexuality as some people think, it's pretty well documented, that at best, the writers of the various books weren't big fans.

More importantly, what is the relevance? Why should someone else's religion affect my marriage?

Kaldor wrote:

Polonius wrote:While the bible doesn't make nearly as big a deal of homosexuality as some people think, it's pretty well documented, that at best, the writers of the various books weren't big fans.

More importantly, what is the relevance? Why should someone else's religion affect my marriage?

Nowadays, no reason. A few decades ago you could've been beaten to death for it, tho...

I also would like to commend you on your astute and repeated use of the question ''why?''. It's so very refreshing.

Kovnik Obama wrote:Nowadays, no reason. A few decades ago you could've been beaten to death for it, tho... :

If you don't mind me somewhat nudging your premise from "gay marriage" to simply "being gay", then it's no longer a few decades ago, even.

Good on the Dems for pushing for this.

Ouze wrote:
If you don't mind me somewhat nudging your premise from "gay marriage" to simply "being gay", then it's no longer a few decades ago, even.

I don't mind
Except maybe that it's no longer a cultural thing - may vary on the community - more a 'being a fething moron' kind of thing, even if it's being moronic as a group. Anyway, I hope.

Shadowseer_Kim wrote:Huh, and if you actually talk to any biblical scholars, read their wriings or listen to them speak they will tell you it has been editted.

Every single one I have ever heard and read will tell you that the Bible most certainly has been mistranslated severely to match the views of the Roman Catholic Church. So much so that they changed the entire meaning of portions of the text, edited the heck out of it, and excluded a lot of Biblical books.

The Bible as most of you know it is inaccurate and incomplete at best. There are some good compendiums, and some printings that will show you what the meanings of words were in Hebrew historically, and show you a much closer to original meaning of the book.

Goodluck in your further quest for spiritual enlightenment and understanding.

It's very convenient when you can throw out a bunch of "facts" and not even attempt to back them up.

Which "biblical scholars" The liberal ones?

Edited where exactly? ( I think I pointed out that textual variants do exist in my last post)

Mistranslated "severely to match the views of the catholic church" Again proof?

Define exclude "biblical books" Heritical writings don't count.

Also the davinci code hardly counts as a scholarly book.

GG

Whether the bible is anti-gay or not is irrelevant in the context of secular law.

generalgrog wrote:
Define exclude "biblical books" Heritical writings don't count.

"Things I don't like don't count."

dogma wrote:

generalgrog wrote:
Define exclude "biblical books" Heritical writings don't count.

"Things I don't like don't count."

This. Who decided what was heretical? Gee, I guess that would've been the Church. Who would've thunk it?

Kaldor wrote:

Polonius wrote:While the bible doesn't make nearly as big a deal of homosexuality as some people think, it's pretty well documented, that at best, the writers of the various books weren't big fans.

More importantly, what is the relevance? Why should someone else's religion affect my marriage?

it doesn't. It REALLY doesn't as you're not a citizen of the USA anyway.

generalgrog wrote:

Shadowseer_Kim wrote:Huh, and if you actually talk to any biblical scholars, read their wriings or listen to them speak they will tell you it has been editted.

Every single one I have ever heard and read will tell you that the Bible most certainly has been mistranslated severely to match the views of the Roman Catholic Church. So much so that they changed the entire meaning of portions of the text, edited the heck out of it, and excluded a lot of Biblical books.

The Bible as most of you know it is inaccurate and incomplete at best. There are some good compendiums, and some printings that will show you what the meanings of words were in Hebrew historically, and show you a much closer to original meaning of the book.

Goodluck in your further quest for spiritual enlightenment and understanding.

It's very convenient when you can throw out a bunch of "facts" and not even attempt to back them up.

Which "biblical scholars" The liberal ones?

Edited where exactly? ( I think I pointed out that textual variants do exist in my last post)

Mistranslated "severely to match the views of the catholic church" Again proof?

Define exclude "biblical books" Heritical writings don't count.

Also the davinci code hardly counts as a scholarly book.

GG

Excuse me for butting in but...

Are you a Christian? Asking someone else for proof to back up their points?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:

Kaldor wrote:

Polonius wrote:While the bible doesn't make nearly as big a deal of homosexuality as some people think, it's pretty well documented, that at best, the writers of the various books weren't big fans.

More importantly, what is the relevance? Why should someone else's religion affect my marriage?

it doesn't. It REALLY doesn't as you're not a citizen of the USA anyway.

We've got the same backwards, bigoted laws here. Much to my shame.

Might be a little off topic but....Wife and I in the process of buying a home. Few houses we looked at has Home Owner Association dues. We back off from those after a couple had "good christian morals". So we're making a play on a house in the country with a indoor size olypic pool

OOf, I'd avoid a HOA like the plague, unless there was some enormously substantial discount on the house.

I wish I had enough money to buy one of those houses where they require "good Christian morals" and then turn it in to a soup kitchen and homeless shelter.

What? They DID say it required good Christian morals. And there is nothing more Christian than helping the downtrodden. Wait, I'm not allowed? But it requires good Christian morals!

Ouze wrote:OOf, I'd avoid a HOA like the plague, unless there was some enormously substantial discount on the house.

?
HOA's exist in most subdivisions. You sign on when you buy the house. They are similar to condo associations.

Ou tof curiousity, is Romans and Corinthians considered to be the works of Paul? I'm not exactly a biblical scholr myself. I'm pretty sure Corinthians is, but Romans I am less sure about.

Yeah, Corinthians was a series of letters written by Paul to people in Corinth, if memory serves right.

Mind you, the letters were originally in a very casual speech, and not the grandiose, overly formal speech used by most bibles.

Melissia wrote:Yeah, Corinthians was a series of letters written by Paul to people in Corinth, if memory serves right.

Mind you, the letters were originally in a very casual speech, and not the grandiose, overly formal speech used by most bibles.

I think you'll find Corinthians right after Antioch: Paul's letters to his cleaner.

Melissia wrote:I wish I had enough money to buy one of those houses where they require "good Christian morals" and then turn it in to a soup kitchen and homeless shelter!

This is easily the best thing you've written on Dakka. Well, maybe there was better, I'm pretty loaded and prone to wild claims right now, but it was still awesome.

Oh, and was already pointed by another poster, Australia is at least ad backward on this issue as the USA is. At least it's an issue up for debate in your country, that a major political party may soon adopt. Here no major party will touch it

Paul's letters to his cleaner

The cleaners by "All you can eat china buffet?" resturant thats run by a korean american?

Jihadin wrote:

Paul's letters to his cleaner

The cleaners by "All you can eat china buffet?" resturant thats run by a korean american?

No thats in Promethians: Paul's Letter to His Tailor (on the back of a take out receipt).