Announcement

Collapse

Deeper Waters Forum Guidelines

Notice – The ministries featured in this section of TheologyWeb are guests of this site and in some cases not bargaining for the rough and tumble world of debate forums, though sometimes they are. Additionally, this area is frequented and highlighted for guests who also very often are not acclimated to debate fora. As such, the rules of conduct here will be more strict than in the general forum. This will be something within the discretion of the Moderators and the Ministry Representative, but we simply ask that you conduct yourselves in a manner considerate of the fact that these ministries are our invited guests. You can always feel free to start a related thread in general forum without such extra restrictions. Thank you.

Deeper Waters is founded on the belief that the Christian community has long been in the shallow end of Christianity while there are treasures of the deep waiting to be discovered. Too many in the shallow end are not prepared when they go out beyond those waters and are quickly devoured by sharks. We wish to aid Christians to equip them to navigate the deeper waters of the ocean of truth and come up with treasure in the end.

We also wish to give special aid to those often neglected, that is, the disabled community. This is especially so since our founders are both on the autism spectrum and have a special desire to reach those on that spectrum. While they are a special emphasis, we seek to help others with any disability realize that God can use them and that they are as the Psalmist says, fearfully and wonderfully made.

General TheologyWeb forum rules: here.
See more
See less

The Supreme Court And Redefining Marriage

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Adrift View Post
    The slave trade was doing just fine without people justifying it with the Bible, on the other hand, it took Christians using their Bibles to end it. Same can be said for the rest.
    Especially considering that it had been going on long before Christianity ever started.

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
    "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Adrift View Post
      The slave trade was doing just fine without people justifying it with the Bible, on the other hand, it took Christians using their Bibles to end it. Same can be said for the rest.
      Yes, it definitely was the Bible specifically (all those specific anti-slave verses), and not the obvious sustainability of the system itself.

      I'm not impressed with religion's role in correcting a problem it also perpetuated.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by whag View Post
        Yes, it definitely was the Bible specifically (all those specific anti-slave verses), and not the obvious sustainability of the system itself.
        Yes, because slavery wasn't sustainable for thousands of years before Christians came upon the scene and highlighted the equality of all within the body of Christ.

        I'm not impressed with religion's role in correcting a problem it also perpetuated.
        Again, not unexpected.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by whag View Post
          Yes, it definitely was the Bible specifically (all those specific anti-slave verses), and not the obvious sustainability of the system itself.

          I'm not impressed with religion's role in correcting a problem it also perpetuated.
          Indentured servitude is not the same as kidnapping someone to be a slave because he has dark skin. Did ya know that kidnapping was a capital crime in ancient Israel?
          If it weren't for the Resurrection of Jesus, we'd all be in DEEP TROUBLE!

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Adrift View Post
            Yes, because slavery wasn't sustainable for thousands of years before Christians came upon the scene and highlighted the equality of all within the body of Christ.
            Again, too rosy. It's not nearly that superheroic. If the economy still depended on slave crops and slaves weren't revolting in alarming numbers, we'd still have it. You know this about the church.



            Originally posted by Adrift View Post
            Again, not unexpected.
            Equally expected that you laud your own religion overmuch with simplistic explanations. I noticed you didn't address the slavery of third world women to childbearing, which conservative Christianity perpetuates.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
              Here's the difficultly there, fm..... Christians (at least many of us) believe homosexuality is a sin. A "gay couple" has made the choice to perpetuate sin. It's more akin to anybody else who came to us and said, "I want you to accept me, but I want to continue sinning".
              They don't believe that their relationship is sinful. They're not consciously thinking "I want you to accept me, but I want to continue sinning."

              Even with the woman caught in adultery, Jesus didn't say, "OK, cool - continue as you were". He told her "go and sin no more".
              Jesus showed his love for her through his actions--mainly, that he defended her from people who wanted to stone her. He didn't start off by lecturing her about how sinful he thought she was. Christians can apply a similar principle. Stand up for gay people in times of need and injustice. Come to their defense if they're under attack. If you can show gay people through your actions that you genuinely love them, they'll likely be more receptive to the possibility of same-sex relationships being sinful.

              Basically, I'm reiterating what I already said--treat them as people, not as issues. The mature adults who wish to marry other consenting mature adults after this ruling obviously aren't in support of pedophilia and would likely severely condemn it. So dropping the dumb comparisons to pedophilia would be a nice start.

              Above all, do NOT let anyone get away with statements like this:

              Gays are a generally miserable lot. Homosexuality and deep-seated psychological problems go hand in hand (for obvious reasons), and it is extremely rare to come across someone who is gay and genuinely happy and satisfied with his life. They thought that pushing for broader social acceptance would bring them happiness, but it didn't. They thought that pushing for broader legal acceptance would bring them happiness, but it didn't. So they looked around and saw all these happy, married, heterosexual couples and thought, "Ah ha! So that's the secret! If only we could marry. Then we would truly be happy!" And so the push over the past several years has been the actions of people desperate to escape the misery of their existence, thinking that happiness, real, lasting happiness, is just a court decision away. And I'm sure they're happy today, or at least they think they are. The problem, of course, is that you can't run away from yourself, and they'll find, to their increasing frustration, that they're right back at the same, miserable condition they were decades ago when they began this crusade. And so they'll set their sights on the next target, and the whole thing will start over again.

              There's no end to it because there is no magical solution that will bring happiness to homosexuals.
              I mean, what the hell? I struggle to even begin to describe how irrational, presumptuous and insulting that is. The poster, whom I refuse to name here, is shamelessly engaging in contrived psychoanalysis--acting as if he can read people's minds and "tell" that a majority of them (hence the "generally") are filled with internal frustration and misery, or that they have deep-seated psychological problems. Or being able to predict the future and just "know" that marriages won't bring them lasting happiness. There's simply no way of knowing that, at least not at the moment. Besides, the evidence that already exists indicates that marriages can bring much lasting joy to people, so if anything, the future is likely to show that marriages WILL bring gay couples joy as well.

              And again, that's what I mean by "treat them as people, not as issues." Besides that abominable screed, the nameless poster has also spread excrement about studies purportedly showing that children are more likely to suffer harm under gay parents. Never mind that most, if not all, of those studies have been shown to be flawed, and that other studies have come to the opposite conclusion. Essentially telling someone "You can't be a good parent, because some other people who share with you this one characteristic of your brain being wired to feel attraction only to people of the same sex weren't good parents" does not send the impression that you love that person. Love would involve directly getting to know him/her on a personal level, not viewing him/her as a statistic.


              Originally posted by Zymologist View Post
              You're absolutely right that Christians should be known by their love (the Bible says this almost exactly), and that we often aren't. That's bad. However, this particular situation is difficult because it seems as though any opposition to SSM or homosexuality at all is defined as hateful, so that Christians literally can't say, "I disagree with your lifestyle but still love you." At least, not without being dismissed as hateful and bigoted simply by definition.
              It's true that some gay rights advocates are too quick to call dissenters hateful and bigoted. That said, above I've listed some examples of ways that Christians can genuinely show love to people and make it clear that they aren't hateful or bigoted.
              Last edited by fm93; 06-26-2015, 09:30 PM.
              Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17

              I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Christianbookworm View Post
                I'm confused. How is a preference for a romantic partner of a certain gender a lifestyle????
                It isn't. That's another thing that the church needs to stop doing--drop the use of lines like "the gay lifestyle," especially if you're a Christian talking to a gay person whom you don't know well. As if all such people lived in the exact same manner and did the exact same things.
                Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17

                I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by fm93 View Post
                  It isn't. That's another thing that the church needs to stop doing--drop the use of lines like "the gay lifestyle," especially if you're a Christian talking to a gay person whom you don't know well. As if all such people lived in the exact same manner and did the exact same things.
                  Then how is it different from promiscuity? Or any other sexual sin? Or any other sin?
                  If it weren't for the Resurrection of Jesus, we'd all be in DEEP TROUBLE!

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by fm93 View Post
                    They don't believe that their relationship is sinful.
                    Alcoholics don't believe they have a drinking problem.

                    They're not consciously thinking "I want you to accept me, but I want to continue sinning."
                    Of course not - no more than an alcoholic is consciously thinking "I want you to accept me, but I want to continue drinking".

                    Jesus showed his love for her through his actions--mainly, that he defended her from people who wanted to stone her. He didn't start off by lecturing her about how sinful he thought she was.
                    Yeah, neither do I.

                    Christians can apply a similar principle. Stand up for gay people in times of need and injustice.
                    Um..... Jesus didn't call me to "stand up for gay people". That seems to be something that concerns you - are you doing anything about it other than posting on the internet?

                    Come to their defense if they're under attack. If you can show gay people through your actions that you genuinely love them, they'll likely be more receptive to the possibility of same-sex relationships being sinful.
                    I don't think you have a clue how the Holy Spirit works.

                    Basically, I'm reiterating what I already said--treat them as people, not as issues.
                    I have never treated a gay person as anything other than a person. I have not, however, pretended that they're not living in sin.

                    The mature adults who wish to marry other consenting mature adults after this ruling obviously aren't in support of pedophilia and would likely severely condemn it. So dropping the dumb comparisons to pedophilia would be a nice start.
                    Homosexuality and pedophilia are both sins. So drop the dumb attempt make it acceptable to God or the Church.
                    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                      Alcoholics don't believe they have a drinking problem.
                      Such a pathetically overused comparison. Alcoholism is destructive. Two women making love to each other doesn’t harm either party.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by whag View Post
                        Such a pathetically overused comparison. Alcoholism is destructive. Two women making love to each other doesn’t harm either party.
                        Interesting that you went with two women instead of two men.
                        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by fm93 View Post

                          I mean, what the hell? I struggle to even begin to describe how irrational, presumptuous and insulting that is. The poster, whom I refuse to name here, is shamelessly engaging in contrived psychoanalysis--acting as if he can read people's minds and "tell" that a majority of them (hence the "generally") are filled with internal frustration and misery, or that they have deep-seated psychological problems. Or being able to predict the future and just "know" that marriages won't bring them lasting happiness. There's simply no way of knowing that, at least not at the moment. Besides, the evidence that already exists indicates that marriages can bring much lasting joy to people, so if anything, the future is likely to show that marriages WILL bring gay couples joy as well.
                          Isn't that awesome? That poster's name is Mountain Man. Nothing wrong in identifying someone who says something that ignorant and bigoted.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                            Interesting that you went with two women instead of two men.
                            Even more interesting that when you think of gays, you always think of male-on-male buttsex.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by whag View Post
                              Even more interesting that when you think of gays, you always think of male-on-male buttsex.
                              Conservatives seem strangely obsessed with that. I've tried pointing out that statistics show it's not actually a particularly widespread form of sexual activity among gay men, and that it's now becoming reasonably common among heterosexual couples. But alas... in the minds of many conservatives gay = buttsex and it's apparently all they can think about.
                              "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                              "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                              "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by whag View Post
                                Even more interesting that when you think of gays, you always think of male-on-male buttsex.
                                Ah, so you're doing the mind reader thing again!

                                I think you chose "two women" because you really can't argue that homosexual sex is not harmful.

                                Even with all this euphoria about how wonderful it is to be gay....
                                Source: CDC

                                While anyone who has sex can get an STD, sexually active gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (MSM) are at greater risk. In addition to having higher rates of syphilis, more than half of all new HIV infections occur among MSM. Many factors contribute to the higher rates of STDs among MSM:

                                © Copyright Original Source

                                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-15-2024, 10:19 PM
                                14 responses
                                75 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-13-2024, 10:13 PM
                                6 responses
                                61 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-12-2024, 09:36 PM
                                1 response
                                23 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-11-2024, 10:19 PM
                                0 responses
                                22 views
                                2 likes
                                Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-08-2024, 11:59 AM
                                5 responses
                                50 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                                Working...
                                X