Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Thoughts on "God and the Gay Christian"?

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by whag View Post
    You didn't quote God's condemnation of David re: illicit sex. Notice that God burns with anger over a census, though. Thousands killed over it.
    This is not a very good argument. The scriptures demonstrate plainly that God instructed that one man and one woman will become one flesh, and that a king must not marry many wives. David married many women, and had many concubines, and in the process reaped the consequences of his actions. These consequences ranged from the death and rape of his children, and the decline and eventual overthrow of his dynasty.

    Okay now you're lying about me intentionally misquoting people, just like you freaked out with Dee Dee.
    The issues I "freaked out" about with Dee Dee included her support and advocacy of bondage and discipline, sadomasochism, and adult corporal punishment.

    Now you have to search threads to corroborate my misquotations, which is boring and a waste of time. It's really stupid, especially since I explained our current misunderstanding, which was not a misquote, in this thread. Go back and read what I said.
    I don't have to search the threads. You intentionally put words in other people's mouths, and misquote people, and you do this with some regularity. This isn't something I'm freaking out about, this is something that's obvious to a number of other readers, and that others have called you out on in the past.

    Re: skeptic behavior, skeptics aren't a homogenous group that I bother to monitor or choose to represent. I'm not selling a group's image, and don't referee other skeptics' posts. I literally don't care to spread a gospel of skepticism governed by a code of uniform conduct. Sorry to disappoint you! =P
    I'll remember that next time you suggest to a Christian that they ought to reword their posts so that others don't get the wrong impression as you did several times in the Glenn Miller thread to Chrawnus. And if you don't care about how your own conduct is perceived why should you be dismayed when you're called out on it? Why should anyone take anything you say at all seriously?

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
      I do not believe that the book has sound Biblical foundation. It's main purpose is to justify Homosexuality. Biblical foundation view of Chastity trumps reform such as proposed here.
      A book arguing for a position is suspect because its main purpose is to argue for a position?

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Adrift View Post
        This is not a very good argument. The scriptures demonstrate plainly that God instructed that one man and one woman will become one flesh, and that a king must not marry many wives. David married many women, and had many concubines, and in the process reaped the consequences of his actions. These consequences ranged from the death and rape of his children, and the decline and eventual overthrow of his dynasty.
        It's instructive that someone mired in sexual sin can still be considered exceptionally faithful and considerate of God's heart. Besides, you get my point: God immediately interacts with David on a census but is silent when he commits flagrant illicit sex. You undoubtedly know that's puzzling and weird.



        Originally posted by Adrift View Post
        The issues I "freaked out" about with Dee Dee included her support and advocacy of bondage and discipline, sadomasochism, and adult corporal punishment.
        She didn't "advocate" it. She acknowledged that sexuality is strange and mysterious, and which is actually quite refreshing and certainly not something to freak out about.




        Originally posted by Adrift View Post
        I don't have to search the threads. You intentionally put words in other people's mouths, and misquote people, and you do this with some regularity. This isn't something I'm freaking out about, this is something that's obvious to a number of other readers, and that others have called you out on in the past.
        You can't show I misquoted. A number of other readers don't frapeak out but are even keeled and mature, such as King's Gambit. You could learn a lot from those who don't get overwrought.



        Originally posted by Adrift View Post
        I'll remember that next time you suggest to a Christian that they ought to reword their posts so that others don't get the wrong impression as you did several times in the Glenn Miller thread to Chrawnus. And if you don't care about how your own conduct is perceived why should you be dismayed when you're called out on it? Why should anyone take anything you say at all seriously?
        I'm not dismayed and don't care how seriously you take me. I read your exchange with Dee Dee.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Adrift View Post
          Is it fuzzy? Doesn't seem like polygamy and promiscuity worked out too well for either David or Solomon. And it doesn't appear that any new revelation has come along on the subject of sexual sin (or anything else for that matter) since the closing of the canon.
          Are you arguing here that the Bible unambiguously condemns any kind of sexual relationship other than marriage between one man and one woman?

          If so, you might want to read the following: http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smit...y/Not_Biblical.

          Note 2 Samuel 12:8 as well:
          I gave your master's house to you, and your master's wives into your arms. I gave you all Israel and Judah. And if all this had been too little, I would have given you even more.

          Was God against polygamy? Why then would he give wives to David and promise to have given even more had David been faithful?
          Last edited by Enjolras; 02-20-2015, 08:16 PM.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by whag View Post
            The point being that Paul's advice seems to be only for men. Consider the multitude of reasons men have "passion problems."
            Care to correct this misunderstanding?

            Originally posted by Sparko View Post
            1 Cor 7:8 Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do. 9 But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
            Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by whag View Post
              The Bible is far from clear on sexual sins. One need only look at David's and Solomon's cadre of wives and concubines to see the fuzziness that surrounds the topic, especially with regard to context and the progressive revelation about homosexuality.
              I missed the part of the Bible where God commended David and Solomon for their behavior. Can you point me in the right direction?

              Originally posted by whag View Post
              As for what you said about promiscuity, I didn't advocate that. I merely said that high libido can point to psychological and physical problems that marriage isn't necessarily a solution to.
              And of course the Bible clearly teaches that if it is too hard to follow the rules it is okay just to ignore the hard part.
              Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                I missed the part of the Bible where God commended David and Solomon for their behavior. Can you point me in the right direction?
                God condemned their unfaithfulness, but never their polygamy.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by seasanctuary View Post
                  It's not an "everyone has been missing this and I'm the great discoverer!" kind of book. There is a long history of doubt that this or that passage was really condemning committed same-sex relationships. What this book does is, yes, package these ideas in a coherent, accessible way.
                  The world also has a long history of distorting the words of God. This is just one more example.

                  Originally posted by seasanctuary View Post
                  Plus, it's a relatively recent thing for the general public to acknowledge that there are people with exclusively same-sex orientation. It's an even more recent thing to see Exodus International close down its "reparative therapy" efforts for being ineffective and damaging.
                  Ah now you are saying that we moderns have learned enough to reject the things given by God. We are smarter than He is?
                  Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                    I missed the part of the Bible where God commended David and Solomon for their behavior. Can you point me in the right direction?
                    Can you point me to where I said God commended them for their flagrant sexual sins? I said God was silent when David and Solomon flagrantly schtooped multiple wives and concubines.

                    Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                    And of course the Bible clearly teaches that if it is too hard to follow the rules it is okay just to ignore the hard part.
                    I didn't say anything like that, either. Rather, I said that Paul's advice to horny people to marry is awful advice in today's context. Paul was ignorant of the psychological and physical roots of continual horniness. Overactive libido is NOT normal, and certainly not something to ask a spouse who doesn't have the same level of arousal to experience.

                    Persistent passion becomes more of a primal expression than the love-making act I assume you think sex is intended to be.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by seasanctuary View Post
                      A book arguing for a position is suspect because its main purpose is to argue for a position?
                      Good point!!!
                      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                      go with the flow the river knows . . .

                      Frank

                      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                        Ah now you are saying that we moderns have learned enough to reject the things given by God. We are smarter than He is?
                        I'm suggesting--and this book is arguing--that being opposed to committed same-sex relationships is a cultural thing that isn't backed up by the Bible.

                        Repeating your own attitude isn't the same as invoking God.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by seasanctuary View Post
                          I'm suggesting--and this book is arguing--that being opposed to committed same-sex relationships is a cultural thing that isn't backed up by the Bible.
                          Because all same-sex relationships in the first century and before were not committed, they were not loving, they were merely lustful! But as loving relationships have now been developed, they are sanctified by true love.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by whag View Post
                            It's instructive that someone mired in sexual sin can still be considered exceptionally faithful and considerate of God's heart. Besides, you get my point: God immediately interacts with David on a census but is silent when he commits flagrant illicit sex. You undoubtedly know that's puzzling and weird.
                            No, I don't know that its puzzling and weird. What I find puzzling and weird is that, even after I showed you OT passages against polygamy, you pretend that David and Solomon didn't reap the consequences of their sinful actions.


                            She didn't "advocate" it. She acknowledged that sexuality is strange and mysterious, and which is actually quite refreshing and certainly not something to freak out about.
                            Well I'll give you that BDSM is definitely strange. I think you'll find that most Christians don't think it refreshing.

                            You can't show I misquoted. A number of other readers don't frapeak out but are even keeled and mature, such as King's Gambit. You could learn a lot from those who don't get overwrought.
                            King's Gambit knows that you regularly pull this goofy debate trick.

                            I'm not dismayed and don't care how seriously you take me. I read your exchange with Dee Dee.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Adrift View Post
                              No, I don't know that its puzzling and weird. What I find puzzling and weird is that, even after I showed you OT passages against polygamy, you pretend that David and Solomon didn't reap the consequences of their sinful actions.
                              It wasn't the polygamy that God was against.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Enjolras View Post
                                Are you arguing here that the Bible unambiguously condemns any kind of sexual relationship other than marriage between one man and one woman?
                                Um. Yeah, of course.

                                If so, you might want to read the following: http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smit...y/Not_Biblical.

                                Note 2 Samuel 12:8 as well:
                                I gave your master's house to you, and your master's wives into your arms. I gave you all Israel and Judah. And if all this had been too little, I would have given you even more.

                                Was God against polygamy? Why then would he give wives to David and promise to have given even more had David been faithful?
                                Awesome! I was waiting for someone to pull out this verse. Paul Copan has an excellent commentary on this passage:

                                Source: Is God a Moral Monster? by Paul Copan

                                Allegedly, God's own commentary here (through Nathan the prophet) suggests an endorsement of polygamy. After David's power-rape of Bathsheba and the murder of her husband, Uriah, God tells David, "I also gave you your master's house and your master's wives unto your care . . . ; and if that had been too little, I would have added to you many more things like these" (2 Sam. 12:8). Isn't God graciously providing multiple wives for David?

                                We should be careful about reading too much into the word gave. After all, the same word is used in 2 Samuel 12:11: "Behold, I will raise up evil against you from your own household; I will even take your wives before your eyes, and give them to your companion." Certainly God didn't demonstrate his approval of polygamy by "giving" David's wives over to his treacherous son Absalom.

                                Furthermore, the "master" mentioned in 12:8 is Saul. The sentence indicating that God "gave" Saul's "house" and "wives" to David is probably a general reference to the transfer of Saul's estate to the new monarch, David. If David took Saul's wife Ahinoam (1 Sam. 14:50) to be his own, this would be in violation of levitical law: Ahinoam was the mother of Michal, whom Saul gave to David as a wife, and Leviticus 18:17 forbids marrying one's mother-in-law. So this passage hardly lends support to God's endorsement of polygamy.

                                © Copyright Original Source

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
                                39 responses
                                170 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                                21 responses
                                132 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                                80 responses
                                426 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                                45 responses
                                303 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by rogue06, 12-26-2023, 11:05 AM
                                406 responses
                                2,509 views
                                2 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Working...
                                X