Quote:
|
Originally Posted by slipstrike0159
Also look at Isaiah 3:9 which says, "The shew of their countenance doth witness against them; and they declare their sin as Sodom, they hid it not. Woe unto their soul! for they have rewarded evil unto themselves."
How about this one? 1 Corinthians 6: 9 - "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind." Abusers of themselves as it is put has a footnote that relates them to Homosexuals/Homosexuality.
Jude 1:7 - "Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire." With yet more footnotes relating to homosexuality.
|
Forgive me, but I really don't understand these three passages at all. I GUESS I could see how they could relate to homosexuality being sinful, but also note how nowhere in those three passages is there anything mentioning lesbians being sinful.
That just confuses me.... Also, about the 2 bolded things, what exactly do you mean by "footnotes"? Is that a CliffsNotes-styled shortened interpretation of sections of the Bible available in some editions or something? Sorry, I'm a terrible Catholic, haven't looked in a Bible in a good 4-5 months. ><
Quote:
Originally Posted by slipstrike0159
Perhaps the New Testament? Romans 1: 27 - "And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet."
So i believe that the bible indeed DOES show that it is a sin.
|
Now...see, here's where I have a problem with taking everything in the Holy Bible literally without regards to the culture of the time(s) in which it was written. You say that, according to these passages, the Bible is saying that homosexuality, in particularly "men laying with men", is sinful but:
Quote:
|
Perhaps the New Testament? Romans 1: 27 - "And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet."
|
...correct me if I'm wrong, but is not this passage also saying that the natural use of women...is to have sexual intercourse with them solely for the purpose of furthering your species? "The natural use of woman;" my personal "footnotes" I get from that is that the Bible is saying women are to be "used" by men to have sex with to make babies. Now how exactly is that fair to women? (<-- Feminist criticism alert, look out.)
I'm not trying to derail the debate, but merely show that one has to consider the cultural perspective of the writers of the Bible: things that were not, in fact, considered "immoral" or "unethical" during that time are what is in the Bible. How could the Bible have possibly predicted that Humankind would eventually allow women to be more baby-makers and housewives if that's basically all that the average woman was back then? Remember that the Bible was written by
human beings, and not by God or Jesus Themselves. Though the words of the two of Them may be what was written, the messages still had to be processed through the brains of the men writing each book (is that the correct term? A "book", one section, like Exodus, Isaiah, 1 John, Revelation, etc.?). Also, the Bible was not originally written in English, or even Latin, if I remember correctly. Whether it was Hebrew or whatever, the Bible had to be translated maaany, many, many, many times to become the Bible as we see it today. And no offense to anyone who might take it, but it's literally impossible for the
exact same words as written 2000+/- years to be perfectly translated with no words "fudged", "changed", or "left out", intentional or otherwise. That's just the basic random variable of Human Error.
Quote:
|
And no, i dont really think that religion is about following one aspect of it or one subject you agree with but then purposely not following another teaching purely cause its not convenient to you.
|
Well, while I could agree with what you say here, I think religion is all about finding your own religion that fits in with your morals and your soul. I mean, you don't have to follow EVERY belief in the Holy Bible in order to be a Christian; if you did, you'd get arrested at some point in time. <.>; LMAO.