Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Blame not Homosexuality, but attack the root.

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by DavidWillts
 



Never said anything in protest of homosexuality. Please post my "protest" of homosexuality or admit that you made that up.


I lied? Hold a moment, please.


Originally posted by DavidWillts


Romans 1:26-27

King James Version (KJV)

26For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

27And 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 recompence of their error which was meet.


Lesbians are a no no too. I really wish people would stop trying to say that the bible somehow condones homosexuality. Nothing is taken out of context, it is really clear on the subject.


Lied...pfft. This is blatant opposition to homosexuality. Next:

Please post where i said that it was "my bible" or that i believe in it, or admit that you made that up.

Well, considering you are posting sections from the Bible and not bothering to include a disclaimer, I can safely assume that you at the very least partially agree with the Bible.


So if you are done dodging, how is that bible passage I posted taken out of context,twisted or misused?


I'm pretty good at admitting I'm wrong. Unfortunately, I have a problem with choosing to be wrong. And if I agreed with you, that's what I'd be.

It's elementary, Watson.




posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Starchild23
I assume you're talking about the reproduction issue? We've covered this.

Not a single place in the world is dealing with reproductive problems. In fact, that's the one thing mankind is exceedingly good at.

Once again, the only remotely valid argument is a religious one, and it's getting old...fast.


It may be getting old and fast, but only for you alone, certainly not for others.

You do have eyes. Do open them and look wide, beyond your village. Worldwide there are declining birth rates. Japan is the major nation facing this problem, and so are other developed nations.

Over-population had long been proven a myth, more so at our current stage of tech evolution whereby we mankind have the ability to use it to improve lives through better management of resources, and a planet that has replenishable resources that could hold several billions more for another few million years.

That myth is nothing more than selfishness at play by the elites, to keep population small and manageable as slaves for their own comfort, not mankind.

The fact remains that if we remain selfish and not think of the future of our race, live selfishly as we desire in the pursuit of personal instant gratification and self happiness today, we would only do ourselves in at some point in time, more when we grow old and feeble.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101
 



Over-population had long been proven a myth, more so at our current stage of tech evolution


Somehow, I think you'd find that if we stopped killing each other over stupid stuff...well, we might be in a lot better shape.

It isn't reproduction that's the problem, it's homicide and greed.

Check, please.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by DavidWillts


Leviticus 18:22: Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.


How is that taken out of context or misused?


Well, there are other interpretations of this quote. People who are against homosexuality tend to interpret it one way. People who are not against homosexuality tend to interpret it another way.


Constitutional attorneys sometimes discuss the idea of "original intent." In answering this question about homosexuality, understanding original intent in scripture is vitally important. Was God talking about modern, twenty first century, committed, faithful, non-cultic, same sex partnerships or was He talking about pagan sexual rituals in worship of the Canaanite fertility goddess? There is no evidence in the Bible that God or OT Jews or Jesus Christ Himself understood Leviticus 18:22 & 20:13 as prohibiting committed, faithful, non-cultic, same sex partnerships. The - homosexuality wrong - idea comes from taking verses out of context.


www.gaychristian101.com...
edit on 9-4-2012 by kaylaluv because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Starchild23
 




Lied...pfft. This is blatant opposition to homosexuality. Next:

That is what the bible says about it, i thought my use of external quote tags would have made that clear. So post where i have laid out my opposition to homosexuality or admit that your are making things up.



Well, considering you are posting sections from the Bible and not bothering to include a disclaimer, I can safely assume that you at the very least partially agree with the Bible.

I would think that by now you would have realized that I do not believe in what the bible says but it seems you need to have everything spelled out for you. I DON'T BELIEVE IN THE BIBLE. Do you understand the difference between my posts and the bible?



It's elementary, Watson.

I know its like elementary school, its like i need to use colorful pictures and use disclaimers so i don't confuse people.

Now if you are all done, how is that bible passage taken out of context,misused or twisted?


edit on 9-4-2012 by DavidWillts because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by kaylaluv

Originally posted by DavidWillts


Leviticus 18:22: Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.


How is that taken out of context or misused?





Constitutional attorneys sometimes discuss the idea of "original intent." In answering this question about homosexuality, understanding original intent in scripture is vitally important. Was God talking about modern, twenty first century, committed, faithful, non-cultic, same sex partnerships or was He talking about pagan sexual rituals in worship of the Canaanite fertility goddess? There is no evidence in the Bible that God or OT Jews or Jesus Christ Himself understood Leviticus 18:22 & 20:13 as prohibiting committed, faithful, non-cultic, same sex partnerships. The - homosexuality wrong - idea comes from taking verses out of context.


www.gaychristian101.com...
edit on 9-4-2012 by kaylaluv because: (no reason given)


Well I have to give you a star for being the only person able to attempt to answer the question. But gaychristian101 is wrong. Now THAT is twisting scripture to fit one's own needs. Gaychristian writes that there is no connection between homosexuality and sodom. While that may be true it really has little to do with Leviticus because it clearly states


“Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination [towebah].” Leviticus 18:22

“If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination [towebah]: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.” Leviticus 20:13

And if you notice it does not say anything about Sodom.
He is just another christian trying to justify cherry picking his beliefs from the bible.



Well, there are other interpretations of this quote. People who are against homosexuality tend to interpret it one way. People who are not against homosexuality tend to interpret it another way.

What other way is there to interpret without twisting or altering it?


Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination- Unless they are gay and/or you don't want to believe in it
lol jesus FTW
edit on 9-4-2012 by DavidWillts because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by kaylaluv
Well, there are other interpretations of this quote. People who are against homosexuality tend to interpret it one way. People who are not against homosexuality tend to interpret it another way.


Yes - - and guess what.

Everyone has a CHOICE of what they CHOOSE to BELIEVE.

Those that CHOOSE the interpretation that homosexuality is an abomination of God - - - are fully 100% responsible for CHOOSING to BELIEVE that interpretation.

There is NO "blame it on the bible" or "God said" - - - - there is Only CHOICE to BELIEVE a certain way.

If YOU are anti-homosexual - - - it is what YOU CHOOSE. It has nothing to do with anything else.

What the Bible Really Says about Homosexuality www.visionsofdaniel.net...

www.christianity-revealed.com...



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by DavidWillts


Leviticus 18:22: Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.


How is that taken out of contest or misused?


The way it reads, it seems the issue isn't with homosexuality, but rather with bisexual men.
Do not like with mankind as with womankind...well, if your gay, you don't lay with womenkind at all, therefore, the comparison is moot as you simply don't lie with mankind as you do with womankind.

So god hates bisexuals..but has no opinion about gays.

As far as the passages you quoted for gay women, there is nothing in there that can be catagorized as lesbianism. A woman's natural use could be for breeding, or milking, cooking, etc...at the time, women were expected to breed, cook, and support a husband amongst a few other duties. That is very open to interpretation.

Also

Romans was written by Paul, not jesus. hell, not even Moses (whom spent most of his literary career giving opinions -not- of god but of his own way of seeing things (see marriage and divorce). Paul twisted a lot of what Christ said, his messages, etc. He made tons of rules and regulations on top of Jesus's words, then seperated Jesus from the people, putting a church in front of salvation of the word.

So ya, Paul...not sure why x-ians even listen to him. Nice guy I am sure, but a bit of a blowhard and made a lot of stuff up while envisioning -his- church.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by DavidWillts
 


Oh, and finally:

The Old Testament in general has no weight on people, Christ came not to dismiss but to fulfill...thereby allowing it all to become about as useful as the lord of the rings.

the OT speaks of many things, stonings, no haircuts, tattoos, eating of unclean animals, working on the sabbath, etc etc etc.
Jesus countered them all in action and word, ultimately, he lifted all of the former rules and put in 3. love self, love neighbor, love god.

-atheist agnostic btw, but know a thing or two about religion-



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


No, that is twisting it. Here you go Romans


Even the women turned against the natural way to have sex and instead indulged in sex with each other. And the men, instead of having normal sexual relationships with women, burned with lust for each other. Men did shameful things with other men and, as a result, suffered within themselves the penalty they so richly deserved.




Romans was written by Paul, not jesus.

Jesus did not know how to write and did not write anything, personally i don't know why christians believe in any of it much less cherry pick what to believe.



not even Moses (whom spent most of his literary career giving opinions -not- of god but of his own way of seeing things (see marriage and divorce).

So christians should listen to Moses but not Paul because he is not Jesus?



So ya, Paul...not sure why x-ians even listen to him. Nice guy I am sure, but a bit of a blowhard and made a lot of stuff up while envisioning -his- church.

Did he make up the last supper,crucifixion and last supper?



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX
reply to post by DavidWillts
 


Oh, and finally:

The Old Testament in general has no weight on people, Christ came not to dismiss but to fulfill...thereby allowing it all to become about as useful as the lord of the rings.

the OT speaks of many things, stonings, no haircuts, tattoos, eating of unclean animals, working on the sabbath, etc etc etc.
Jesus countered them all in action and word, ultimately, he lifted all of the former rules and put in 3. love self, love neighbor, love god.

-atheist agnostic btw, but know a thing or two about religion-


Oh the irony, use the same book as support for saying the Christians do not follow the old testament (Romans 10:4) as the Christians use to justify not accepting homosexuality (Romans 1:26-27).



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by DavidWillts

Well I have to give you a star for being the only person able to attempt to answer the question. But gaychristian101 is wrong. Now THAT is twisting scripture to fit one's own needs. Gaychristian writes that there is no connection between homosexuality and sodom. While that may be true it really has little to do with Leviticus because it clearly states


“Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination [towebah].” Leviticus 18:22

“If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination [towebah]: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.” Leviticus 20:13

And if you notice it does not say anything about Sodom.
He is just another christian trying to justify cherry picking his beliefs from the bible.


You may think that Gaychristian101 is wrong, but others may not...

Here is another example of alternative interpretations.


The first part of this verse is literally translated as "And with a male you shall not lay lyings of a woman"



The verse is, unfortunately, incomplete. Its precise meaning is ambiguous. The phrase "lay lyings" has no obvious interpretation. Attempts have been made to make sense out of the original Hebrew by inserting a short phrase into the verse. For example:

The Net Bible® translation 3 inserts two words to produce "And with a male you shall not lay [as the] lyings of a woman." A man must not have sexual intercourse with another man as he would normally have with a woman. i.e. anal intercourse between two men is not permitted. From this literal, word for word translation, they produce a smoother English version: "You must not have sexual intercourse with a male as one has sexual intercourse with a woman."

An alternative translation would insert a different pair of words to produce: "And with a male you shall not lay [in the] lyings of a woman." That is, two men must not engage in sexual behavior on a woman's bed. Presumably, they must go elsewhere to have sex; a woman's bed was sacred and was to be reserved for heterosexual sex.


www.religioustolerance.org...

Should it be "in the" or "as the"? It seems to me that the translation is not as clear-cut as you would claim.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 06:30 PM
link   
It occurs within nature in a multitude of species and is in no way a human phenomenon. If anything with the burdens our species inflicts on the planet more power to non reproductive unions where love is paramount instead of instinct ruling weak minds and bodies.

It's a fact that statistically the least intelligent of our species reproduce the most as a means to ensure their less capable and more probable to fail offspring do manage to survive. When you couple this with modern advances in medicine, agriculture, and a cultural shift towards preserving the weakest of the species and the various genetic faults and tragedies associated with them you have the true root of societies problems today.

The world is overrun with idiots genetically predisposed to let loose as many spawn as possible without regard for the health of the species or ecosystem. The world needs less of us, not more and it certainly needs a paradigm shift where those who contribute to society while only wanting for love rather than polluting it with throngs of bad seed are vilified and demonized.

The church will always be wrong on the subject and no deity nor man can deny just how far astray the stewards of this world have come through ignorance and the following of base and crude instinct.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 06:42 PM
link   
Has anyone ever considered maybe nature intended some people to be designated non breeders. We have no natural predators except ourselves and have beaten almost every disease that threatens us. Maybe it is genetic but not they way most people think but a way to keep us in check.

I have a theory, look at the black plague around 11-14% of the population was immune, drug addiction 11-14% of the people will be addicted to drugs no matter what the legal status and the list goes on and on always 11-14%. Could it be DNA trying to insure it's survival for a number of different threats? What do the numbers say. Just a theory. Wonder if the 11-14% is the necessary number of survivors need to insure enough genetic variation. Makes me wonder about the bottle neck in our DNA and if it also fits in this theory as well.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 06:46 PM
link   
reply to post by kaylaluv
 


Yes their other favorite approach, don't like what it says? Rewrite it! Also good to note, all the translations he offers are slightly different in wording but they all pretty much say "guys don't have sex with guys".
edit on 9-4-2012 by DavidWillts because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by DavidWillts
reply to post by kaylaluv
 


Yes their other favorite approach, don't like what it says? Rewrite it! Also good to note, all the translations he offers are slightly different in wording but they all pretty much say "guys don't have sex with guys".


Well, it's nice to know we have a Hebrew expert at ATS.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 08:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by LaughingatHumanity
It occurs within nature in a multitude of species and is in no way a human phenomenon.


I don't go with that.

We are ALL mutations from the original (whatever that was).

When the reproductive "soup" gets stirred - - you might get a redhead - - you might get left handed - - you might get homosexual.

There are SO MANY diversities in the creation of a human being - - - - to claim ONE is abomination of God - - - is so unbelievably ridiculous - - its just plain stupid.

At one time Lepers were evil - - - and seizures were "possessed" by the devil.


edit on 9-4-2012 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 08:50 PM
link   
reply to post by DavidWillts
 


a few more Leviticus Quotes while we are at it:

Leviticus 20:9
If anyone curses his father or mother, he must be put to death.

20:10
If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.

Leviticus 19:27 reads "You shall not round off the side-growth of your heads nor harm the edges of your beard."

Leviticus 19:19 reads, "You are to keep My statutes. You shall not breed together two kinds of your cattle; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor wear a garment upon you of two kinds of material mixed together."

Leviticus 11:10 reads, "But whatever is in the seas and in the rivers that does not have fins and scales among all the teeming life of the water, and among all the living creatures that are in the water, they are detestable things to you."


are these Leviticus quotes being taken out of context or twisted?




posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 09:47 PM
link   
reply to post by mythos
 


If you took the time and read what i posted you would see that I don't agree with nor do i believe in the bible, so don't waste your time. Fact is Christianity Judaism and Catholicism are all against homosexuality no matter how you spin it.



are these Leviticus quotes being taken out of context or twisted?

What a stupid question. Considering you just copy/pasted bible passages i don't see how they could be "twisted" or taken out of context.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 10:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101

Originally posted by DavidWillts


Leviticus 18:22: Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.


How is that taken out of contest or misused?


For every law, there IS a reason behind it. If one just blindly read and follow laws without understanding it or why it was necessary, then we are no more than robots. We mankind are NOT robots. Worse when those who do not understand it, see it as an imposition upon them, and bare their fangs.

The reason that law came about is simply about human survival as a species. If more same sex lies with the same, mankind will extinct.

Many here make the claim that there are 7 BILLION of us. No doubt that is true. But if such homosexual lifestyles are not understood, see the flaws and correct them but accepted blindly, soon it will only become a majority. THis is not some fantasy.

Look at what's happening to Japan today. It has a greying population, due to low birthrates in recent decades. Although the case CANNOT be directly attributed to homosexuality, much of it can be laid to the current generation's refusal or fear to have children. They worry about the future, but the fact remains, the birth rates there are declining, then who will support their aged parents whom will no longer be able to lift even a cup of water? We all will grow old one day. Who will support you when you grow old?

I can save and will willingly share what I have for all without complaint, but I am only one and my resources are limited. It can never take care of every aged. Those whom my efforts cannot reach will most certainly die without dignity, after working so hard for many long years.

It need not be this way. Nor do I lay blame upon homosexuals for their way of life. It is a choice that they had made under our current environment. They will have to take responsibility and consequences of their actions.

It is the next generation that we must be concern with. They are innocent. Find out the root of the problem why some of our present generation would opt for homsexual lifestyle, understand them, and then try to find solutions to resolve it so they will not have to suffer the consequences some of us this generation had made.





Nuts. You are living in fear, a fear created by your dogma. How many gay people do you know? I would wager none. The majority of gay people do not choose to be gay, but many choose to hide it for fear of reprisals by people who do not understand, like yourself. Christianity preaches tolerance, so why are many hypocritical christians intolerant of gay people?





new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join