homosexuals (1 Viewer)

[SnowFox]

1 Corinthians 14:35*

 

[Absolutezero]

Tried looking it up - there is no 42nd chapter of Corinthians. What are you reading.

Timothy 2:12 is just as damning if you're interested.

 

[Aquawhite]

I think we should come to the consensus that we're damned and as a result, be treated in the same way because of this equal damnation. Makes things easy.

 

[Azure]

Taking into consideration both passages are from the Old Testament, which was written for the Jews, not the New Testament.

 

[Shadowdude]

1 Corinthians 14:35*

Timothy 2:12 is just as damning if you're interested.

I'm interested. After what's going on in the Thread that Never ends, I need something to take my mind off of.. well, that.

So let's see what it says...

1 Corinthians 14:35 says, "If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church".

Timothy 2:12 says (assuming 1 Timothy), "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, she must be silent".


Hmm, interesting. Interesting. Well, for the Corinthians thing - to me, reading it in context (which is important), it's instructions for worship... for that particular verse it says "Ask own husbands at home because it is disgraceful for them to speak in church". Why is this? We go to verse 34... "women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak but must be in submission, as the Law says". I'm not exactly sure what this 'Law' is, so... yeah.

We probably should also remember this was written in what... the 1st century AD, women had no rights and this is a letter to the church in Corinth.

Timothy's passage is along the same lines - its heading is titled "Instructions on worship". Again, that's difficult because if we go through... it says stuff like 'a woman should learn in quietness and submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent' (verses 11 and 12).


In both cases, I dunno... we have to see who is ordering this, it's the writer of the book. But then one can argue that "Oh but if it's in the Bible, is it not God-ordained?" And then one can counter argue about all that stuff in Leviticus about stoning and whatnot.

However... this might be a bit controversial - but I'm going to lean on, "Women should be silent because in that day and age, women were subservient". I'm not entirely convinced either way, but that's... a good passage to pick out. I think that's one open to interpretation, unfortunately.

 

[Shadowdude]

Taking into consideration both passages are from the Old Testament, which was written for the Jews, not the New Testament.

They're both in the New testament.

 

[Azure]

Yes sorry my bad (obviously cannot multi-task). Disregard and carry on gentlemen.

From first glance I thought you were discussing the same quote from Leviticus you brought up a little while ago

 

[Absolutezero]

Taking into consideration both passages are from the Old Testament, which was written for the Jews, not the New Testament.

Keep in mind that Matthew 5:17 states: Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

While the words of the old testament were written for the Jews, I don't think they can't be dismissed as irrelevant for Christians.

 

[Azure]

Certainly not, but the distinction is that Christians are not directly bound by these rules as the Jews were. They were written specifically for the Jews. It is important to understand the Old Testament because it provides context amongst other things.

I don't want the hijack the thread, so we should probably move the discussion over to the other one.

(Also your rep is mine with the numbers reversed - just noticed that)

 

[Absolutezero]

Certainly not, but the distinction is that Christians are not directly bound by these rules as the Jews were. They were written specifically for the Jews. It is important to understand the Old Testament because it provides context amongst other things.

I don't want the hijack the thread, so we should probably move the discussion over to the other one.

You have a point, and I know we clearly conflict on interpretations in some areas. Not wishing to draw it out further, I just thought it was interesting to mention. A lot of people use the coming of Jesus as an attempt to whitewash the problems of the Old (which I'm not accusing you of).

(Also your rep is mine with the numbers reversed - just noticed that)

Magic

 

[ademayd]

Profanity doesn't exactly endear you to others either, and the anonymity of the internet doesn't really change that.

In regards to the question at hand:

Civil union? No problem, if they want to live together and be recognised for taxation and superannuation purposes, go right ahead.

Marriage? No, it goes against my moral convictions. To everyone that says this is about equality, what you're missing is that marriage is discriminatory by its nature and purpose. Can six year old children get married? Can a brother and sister to each other? How about a man and a dog? Why not marriage between three people, or four? Hyperbole yes but I can apply the exact same rationale. Part of the function of marriage is the raising of children. There are enough children missing a mother or father without artificially exacerbating it further than our massive divorce rates have. Society has done enough to destroy the nuclear family and marriage already.

makes sense

 

[Riproot]

Tried looking it up - there is no 42nd chapter of Corinthians. What are you reading.

I made up the numbers. Clearly.

1 Corinthians 14:35*

Thanks.

I'm interested. After what's going on in the Thread that Never ends, I need something to take my mind off of.. well, that.

So let's see what it says...

1 Corinthians 14:35 says, "If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church".

Timothy 2:12 says (assuming 1 Timothy), "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, she must be silent".


Hmm, interesting. Interesting. Well, for the Corinthians thing - to me, reading it in context (which is important), it's instructions for worship... for that particular verse it says "Ask own husbands at home because it is disgraceful for them to speak in church". Why is this? We go to verse 34... "women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak but must be in submission, as the Law says". I'm not exactly sure what this 'Law' is, so... yeah.

We probably should also remember this was written in what... the 1st century AD, women had no rights and this is a letter to the church in Corinth.

Timothy's passage is along the same lines - its heading is titled "Instructions on worship". Again, that's difficult because if we go through... it says stuff like 'a woman should learn in quietness and submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent' (verses 11 and 12).


In both cases, I dunno... we have to see who is ordering this, it's the writer of the book. But then one can argue that "Oh but if it's in the Bible, is it not God-ordained?" And then one can counter argue about all that stuff in Leviticus about stoning and whatnot.

However... this might be a bit controversial - but I'm going to lean on, "Women should be silent because in that day and age, women were subservient". I'm not entirely convinced either way, but that's... a good passage to pick out. I think that's one open to interpretation, unfortunately.

Pretty sure Paul of Tarsus wrote both and he was supposed to be increasing the role of women in the church and shit like that. So, yeah…
Also, it's in the letters of Paul, so it's a direct teaching in Christianity, especially Catholicism, as they have readings from his letters during mass. So, qawe doesn't know anything about his religion and yet codemns homosexuals' actions because of it.

 

[Shadowdude]

Pretty sure Paul of Tarsus wrote both and he was supposed to be increasing the role of women in the church and shit like that. So, yeah…
Also, it's in the letters of Paul, so it's a direct teaching in Christianity, especially Catholicism, as they have readings from his letters during mass. So, qawe doesn't know anything about his religion and yet codemns homosexuals' actions because of it.

It's difficult though Riproot, because I was given a Bible for my graduation in school - and usually I'd not have much use for it, but it has notes in it which really help one understand passages. It actually has a mini-debate about interpretation in the notes on these passages that you pointed out - says stuff like: "Some believe that this can be taken literally as a God-given order that men are to be served by women for all time... others believe that it is only appropriate to interpret this as part of the context of the time period in which it was written".

But... qawe, I haven't read his posts much though.

 

[Blastus]

lol our magic book said people being gay is unnatural.

Okay so explain why homosexuality behaviour occurs in more than just homo sapiens sapiens

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_displaying_homosexual_behavior

boom

 

[Aquawhite]

It's difficult though Riproot, because I was given a Bible for my graduation in school - and usually I'd not have much use for it, but it has notes in it which really help one understand passages. It actually has a mini-debate about interpretation in the notes on these passages that you pointed out - says stuff like: "Some believe that this can be taken literally as a God-given order that men are to be served by women for all time... others believe that it is only appropriate to interpret this as part of the context of the time period in which it was written".

But... qawe, I haven't read his posts much though.

I'm quite irreligious myself, but I can see how interpretation of passages from the Bible can be great things to model your morals, actions and life upon. It can foster some 'nice' core values in those who seek to treat others with respect and act kindly to others.

If someone chooses to accept the Bible as written words, without interpretation, they are subject to the criticisms of non-religious people. Such as what is happening right now.

 

[Absolutezero]

lol our magic book said people being gay is unnatural.

Okay so explain why homosexuality behaviour occurs in more than just homo sapiens sapiens

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_displaying_homosexual_behavior

boom

 

[Chemical Ali]

we can't legalize gay marriage now, bad things are happening in other countries' economies!

 

[boris]

hahahahahah what come on

 

[cosmo kramer]

fucking dont delete my posts IN MY FUCKING TOPIC I RULE THIS THREAD THIS IS MY KINGDOM

 

[townie]

HMmmm, really trying hard to not use my ability to repeatedly neg rep users on qawe