sub shows Brokeback Mtn to 8th graders

[Nova]

umm, I think she might mean AIDS and other STDs for instance. Just a guess.

Yeah, 'cause heterosexuals never get those.

(ETA: I'm not rolling my eyes at you, Ntegrity, or anyone. I'm just responding to that idea (which you were only summing up for us).)

A century ago, in certain countries and among certain classes, sex between men was considered a "safe" way to avoid the deadly syphilis associated with loose women. Shall we conclude that in those days, God hated heterosexuality and punished heterosexuals with venereal disease?

 

[Ntegrity]

(ETA: I'm not rolling my eyes at you, Ntegrity, or anyone. I'm just responding to that idea (which you were only summing up for us).)

I'm glad you added that because it kinda ticked me off. :angel:

I really shouldn't try to speak for Kool because I don't know what she intended. I only know that I interpreted it as including heterosexuals since she mentioned adultery.

 

[KOOL LOOK]

Oh geez- have I got this right? you are putting adultery and homosexuality in the same bucket?

Some people just don't give me faith in mankind-

I want to answer all these questions being posed to me, but I stand a chance of getting off topic on this thread, and possibly causing someone to think, then say I've broken tos, which I don't feel I have, but I do have to obey the moderators cheerfully. Not that any have said anything to me on this thread to this point.

But to answer your question, I didn't say it, the Bible does. You'll have to take that one up with God. For sin is sin, God doesn't rate it or characterize it like man does. God is Holy and sin can't enter into his Holy presence.

Man judges sin, God instructs us on what sin is and wants us to repent and live a Holy life with him. Lying, theivery, idoltry is just as sinful to God as adultery.

I haven't stolen your faith in mankind Narla, maybe you were that way before you ever read my post, because it sure seems like a big leap to read one persons post and lose faith in mankind, in my opinion.

If you have lost faith in mankind, please re-kindle it, for there is hope and there are good and righteousness all around us.

 

[Nova]

I'm glad you added that because it kinda ticked me off. :angel:

I really shouldn't try to speak for Kool because I don't know what she intended. I only know that I interpreted it as including heterosexuals since she mentioned adultery.

So very sorry, N, that I inadvertently ticked you off even for a moment. (I like to save being obnoxious for times when I really mean it. )

Even if that is what Kool meant, I was just exasperated with the idea, not with her personally. The notion that AIDS is "God's curse" for homosexuals would be laughable if so many people didn't seem willing to believe it. Despite the fact that AIDS occurs primarily among heterosexuals worldwide. Despite the fact that God would be a clumsy deity indeed if He used such a method, since AIDS is so slow and erratic in its effects. (Not denying it's a terrible disease; just saying it isn't a very effective way of getting rid of gay people.) Despite the fact that God must be awfully careless if he strikes at gays with a disease that also kills so many children. Etc., etc., and so forth.

 

[KOOL LOOK]

[/B]
I'm sorry; it's getting late tonight, but that gave me a chuckle.

AM, the Red Tent is really a great book IMO; it's a very popular reading club book, but really made me think about what it was like back in Biblical times.

The author is Anita Diamonte

Historical fiction can often be very well researched and quite accurate; Many books in the Bible are also "historical fiction"; they are a particular person's perception of what happened, sometimes in the past. The books of the Bible often contradict each other, and are often just one or a few persons' perspective. The Psalms are completely different from other parts of the Bible; the New Testment is very different from part of the Old. The Ten Commandments are almost Universal; to me it is dangerous to take the Bible completely "literally". It may be interpreted as something the writer didn't intend at all. I see it as a "Great Guide Book" for us all; or some may even feel they can be moral without the Bible. (Agnostics)

To me, to really know the Bible is like taking a major college course and doing alot of theological and historical study, or studying it heavily at Church with a good teacher, of course. There are many different interpretations depending on your particular Protestant Sect - Lutheran, Methodist, or Baptist for instance. Catholicism is a whole 'nother religion, Judaism is based heavily on the Old Testament. The Amish have their strict religion. Many religions have common tenets.

Above all, I personally believe in trying to be tolerant of different religions, unless I feel they are really harmful to others. (Scientology for instance) How does this relate to homosexuality? Because we judge it by something we "think" someone said in the Bible, and that is the word of God. As Nova explained, this is probably misinterpreted and downright contradicted in other parts of the Bible, according to how we interpret those passages. The Bible is something that can be argued from morning to night; I know because I listened to my Baptist Grandfather argue with my Methodist Father ALL NIGHT LONG.

OK, I'd better be quiet now.

Martha, this is the truth. I just got Nova's pun after reading your quoted post about set me straight. I didn't understand it yesterday, :crazy: for real, okay back to topic. I've always been that way, very very slow when it comes to jokes, etc... it takes me a while to think it through and then sometimes I still don't get it.

 

[Nova]

But to answer your question, I didn't say it, the Bible does.

Kool, if you (or anyone else) can convince me you actually follow ALL the precepts of Leviticus, then I will be able to respect your regard for the two-count-'em-only-two injunctions against gay sex. Otherwise, your invocation of selective rules is arbitrary and, one suspects, based on some inclination other than just obedience to God's Word.

Here are just a few of the rules for you to work on:

The code requires:

a child to be killed if he/she curses their parent (Leviticus 20:9)

all persons guilty of adultery to be killed (20:10)

the daughter of a priest who engages in prostitution to be burned alive until dead (21:9)

the bride of a priest to be a virgin (21:13)

ritual killing of animals, using cattle, sheep and goats (22:19)

observation of 7 feasts: Passover, Feast of Unleavened Bread, Feast of Firstfruits, Feast of Pentecost, Feast of Trumpets, Day of Atonement, Feast of Tabernacles (23)

a person who takes the Lord's name in vain is to be killed (24:16)

The code prohibits:

heterosexual intercourse when a woman has her period (Leviticus 18:19),

harvesting the corners of a field (19:9),

eating fruit from a young tree (19:23),

cross-breeding livestock (19:19),

sowing a field with mixed seed (19:19),

shaving or getting a hair cut (19:27),

tattoos (19:28),

even a mildly disabled person from becoming a priest (21:18),

charging of interest on a loan (25:37),

collecting firewood on Saturday to prevent your family from freezing,

wearing of clothes made from a blend of textile materials; today this might be cotton and polyester, and

eating of non-kosher foods (e.g. shrimp).

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibh2.htm

 

[Nova]

Martha, this is the truth. I just got Nova's pun after reading your quoted post about set me straight. I didn't understand it yesterday, :crazy: for real, okay back to topic. I've always been that way, very very slow when it comes to jokes, etc... it takes me a while to think it through and then sometimes I still don't get it.

That's okay, Kool. My pun wasn't very clever in the first place and not worth anybody's time figuring it out.

 

[IrishMist]

Kool, if you (or anyone else) can convince me you actually follow ALL the precepts of Leviticus, then I will be able to respect your regard for the two-count-'em-only-two injunctions against gay sex. Otherwise, your invocation of selective rules is arbitrary and, one suspects, based on some inclination other than just obedience to God's Word.

Here are just a few of the rules for you to work on:



http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibh2.htm

Good thing I don't believe in that book, or I'd be in a whole heap of trouble!!

 

[KOOL LOOK]

Homosexuality does NOT equate with adultry! :doh:

But why be so cryptic, Kool? I'm curious. What is the real pain and suffering from these "immoral sexual sins"?

Just what are the consequences of these "behaviors and choices"?

What damage do they cause?

Why doesn't it Irish? What's your take on it?

Glad you noticed about my writing, though I wouldn't describe it as being cryptic, I'm more like my Jesus than I realized :silenced: Though I'm not an esteemed writer, or in no way annointed and glorified as Jesus, or maybe I am, if I believe scripture, I liken it to speaking in parables. You having noticed is a credit unto you. I speak that way, so the spiritual eyes and ears can see and hear, not the ones that aren't opened.

In a way, you answered your question with the next question following. So I don't cause anymore pain and suffering, especially to those that can't see and hear. That wouldn't truly understand and it's my way of being merciful.

I don't mind answering questions too, but there again it may get off topic.

The damage is the same as any other sin in our lives, sexual sin doesn't get a free pass from all the sorrow that's going to come if we engage in it. It also opens up doors in our lives, homes and families to the devil for him to come in and do more damage to our lives than we ever intended.

In other words, I can't reveal everything right here. I apologize.

 

[KOOL LOOK]

Kool, if you (or anyone else) can convince me you actually follow ALL the precepts of Leviticus, then I will be able to respect your regard for the two-count-'em-only-two injunctions against gay sex. Otherwise, your invocation of selective rules is arbitrary and, one suspects, based on some inclination other than just obedience to God's Word.

Here are just a few of the rules for you to work on:



http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibh2.htm

Open up a thread, where it can be discussed where I don't feel bound down with rules and chains and we can openly discuss and anyone reading would know in advance that's the topic or topics, so we hopefully can eliminate spirits of offense, even though I know I'm just dreaming, but I truly don't want to alienate or hurt someone. I'll try my best, if you truly are willing to have an open heart and mind.

 

[KOOL LOOK]

umm, I think she might mean AIDS and other STDs for instance. Just a guess.

Well, that of course is correct, but it's just the surface, unfortunately. Being sexually immoral, and at a time in my life I was, sadly leaves a person scarred, tainted, shadowed and changes their very being.

What's done in darkness, will be brought to the light. The sin can turn into curses and be visited upon your next 3 generations, and if it's not recognized for what it is, the person is an unbeliever, or a babe believer never growing up int he word of God they don't know to rebuke and pray over these curses so our loved ones, including ourselves don't continue to have to suffer from them.

 

[IrishMist]

Why doesn't it Irish? What's your take on it?

Glad you noticed about my writing, though I wouldn't describe it as being cryptic, I'm more like my Jesus than I realized :silenced: Though I'm not an esteemed writer, or in no way annointed and glorified as Jesus, or maybe I am, if I believe scripture, I liken it to speaking in parables. You having noticed is a credit unto you. I speak that way, so the spiritual eyes and ears can see and hear, not the ones that aren't opened.

In a way, you answered your question with the next question following. So I don't cause anymore pain and suffering, especially to those that can't see and hear. That wouldn't truly understand and it's my way of being merciful.

I don't mind answering questions too, but there again it may get off topic.

The damage is the same as any other sin in our lives, sexual sin doesn't get a free pass from all the sorrow that's going to come if we engage in it. It also opens up doors in our lives, homes and families to the devil for him to come in and do more damage to our lives than we ever intended.

In other words, I can't reveal everything right here. I apologize.

Now, Kool, you know what my take is on it. We've talked about this before. I don't believe homosexuality is a sin. I think it is a completely natural thing. I believe in God, but not in the Bible. That's my take.

I believe you have every right to believe what you want to. As long as it stays out of our laws and public schools. As long as no one uses it to hurt someone that I love. As long as it's your personal belief and code, I'm fine with that.

 

[Nova]

Open up a thread, where it can be discussed where I don't feel bound down with rules and chains and we can openly discuss and anyone reading would know in advance that's the topic or topics, so we hopefully can eliminate spirits of offense, even though I know I'm just dreaming, but I truly don't want to alienate or hurt someone. I'll try my best, if you truly are willing to have an open heart and mind.

Kool, I don't think the mods will stand for a thread consisting of a verse by verse explication of Leviticus.

But either one follows every rule in the OT, or one makes choices as to which rules are still valid. Of course, EVERYone does the latter and rightly so. But then it follows that some OT rules are no longer valid, and in that case, the mere existence of a rule is no proof it must be followed.

Fortunately, the good Lord gave us reason. We can evaluate each rule to determine whether it is necessary or antiquated.

 

[Nova]

The damage is the same as any other sin in our lives, sexual sin doesn't get a free pass from all the sorrow that's going to come if we engage in it. It also opens up doors in our lives, homes and families to the devil for him to come in and do more damage to our lives than we ever intended.

You should talk to my partner. He'll be happy to compare the pain and suffering caused by his years in a church-sanctioned marriage to a woman v. his three decades of living openly with me. His ex-wife (a lovely woman who deserved better and now has it) will agree.

 

[KOOL LOOK]

Yeah, 'cause heterosexuals never get those.

(ETA: I'm not rolling my eyes at you, Ntegrity, or anyone. I'm just responding to that idea (which you were only summing up for us).)

A century ago, in certain countries and among certain classes, sex between men was considered a "safe" way to avoid the deadly syphilis associated with loose women. Shall we conclude that in those days, God hated heterosexuality and punished heterosexuals with venereal disease?

No, no no Nova! God does not give diseases to punish people for their sins. He just withdraws and hides his face from them, for he can't look upon sin for he is Holy. Veneral diseases are just some of the consequences man brought upon themselves for their own choices of immortality, (sin). Geez, does man do anything or be held responsible at all for their actions? God is not to blame for sicknesses and diseases.

God sacrificed his only begotten Son so that by his stripes we may be healed and have life more abundantly. Jesus wore ever sin and disease upon his body on that fateful day on the cross, he being so distorted, blackened, warped, bleeding, ugly and vunerable due to man's sin. Something he never did, sin.

 

[KOOL LOOK]

I'm glad you added that because it kinda ticked me off. :angel:

I really shouldn't try to speak for Kool because I don't know what she intended. I only know that I interpreted it as including heterosexuals since she mentioned adultery.

You may speak for me anytime, I trust and believe in you.

 

[IrishMist]

No, no no Nova! God does not give diseases to punish people for their sins. He just withdraws and hides his face from them, for he can't look upon sin for he is Holy. Veneral diseases are just some of the consequences man brought upon themselves for their own choices of immortality, (sin). Geez, does man do anything or be held responsible at all for their actions? God is not to blame for sicknesses and diseases.

God sacrificed his only begotten Son so that by his stripes we may be healed and have life more abundantly. Jesus wore ever sin and disease upon his body on that fateful day on the cross, he being so distorted, blackened, warped, bleeding, ugly and vunerable due to man's sin. Something he never did, sin.

So... if you catch a disease, it's because you've sinned?

 

[southcitymom]

So... if you catch a disease, it's because you've sinned?

I know some fanatical New Agey-types who believe this...if they're right, we're all doomed!!!

 

[Nova]

No, no no Nova! God does not give diseases to punish people for their sins. He just withdraws and hides his face from them, for he can't look upon sin for he is Holy. Veneral diseases are just some of the consequences man brought upon themselves for their own choices of immortality, (sin). Geez, does man do anything or be held responsible at all for their actions? God is not to blame for sicknesses and diseases.

Well, of course He is. Either He created everything (including viruses) or He didn't. You can't have it both ways. (Unless you are a Zoroastrian, in which case you believe in two Gods and attribute everything good to one and everything you don't like to the other. Now there's a logic system.)

But you and I agree that God doesn't send specific diseases to target specific groups of people for violating the rules of Leviticus.

 

[southcitymom]

Kool, I don't think the mods will stand for a thread consisting of a verse by verse explication of Leviticus.......

Maybe not, but I would SO dig that!!!!