Homosexuality

[Daystar]

Italy's nominee to become the European Union's Justice and Home Affairs commissioner failed on Monday to win the backing of the European Parliament's Justice Committee, days after testifying that he considers homosexuality a sin.

The panel narrowly failed to endorse Rocco Buttiglione, who is currently Italy's European Affairs minister, said Jean-Louis Bourlanges, chairman of the Justice Committee.

Buttiglione said that he would fight for the rights of homosexuals, but would not back away from his statement that the lifestyle is sinful.

Isn't this the way it should be? Fight for the rights of homosexuals, but individuals, but define their lifestyle as sinful (Lev. 18:22).

[ENIGMA]

[Day] Really! I'm sure you don't think that the nation of Israel is a fable and yet half the Bible is about her. And I'm sure you believe that the Roman Empire invaded Israel in 70AD and destroyed her just as Jesus said would happen? And are you not aware of the secular historians who confirm the existance and death of Jesus Christ? No reality in the Bible??

Hey, don't tell me, tell the bible search. Perhaps I should have set it to the result directly:

Source

....and of the Norse deities in fact. You believe in them so much that you reference the days of the week after them. How funny.

[Day] Norse deities had nothing to do with our calendar. Where do you find such nonsense.

Wikipedia would disagree

Come now there is no need to give God more credit than is due. I mean, the bacterial samples actually exist...

[Day] Homosexuals only imagine they exist. And yes, I give credit to God for saying that the lifestyle is an abomination. He said it, believe it.

I'm sorry, but if homosexuals don't exist, then what are you so concerned about?

Absolutes which seem to change depending upon what era you live in.

[Day] Man changes, but God is the same yesterday, today and forever. His commandments are just as binding today as they were back then.

So then I take it that you support the stoning of disobedient children (or perhaps of those who do not "honor their parents")? (Deut. 21:18-21)

Or was that not one of your so called 'absolutes'?

[Day] Where does the Bible support slavery?

Ok, but remember, you asked....

Exodus
21:2
If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing.
21:3
If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him.
21:4
If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself.
21:5
And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free:

21:6
Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever.

How to sell your daughter
21:7
And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do.
21:8
If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her.
21:20
And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.
21:21
Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.
22:3
If the sun be risen upon him, there shall be blood shed for him; for he should make full restitution; if he have nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft.

Leviticus:
25:44
Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids.
25:45
Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.
25:46
And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.

Ephesians:
6:5 Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ;

[Daystar]

[Day] Really! I'm sure you don't think that the nation of Israel is a fable and yet half the Bible is about her. And I'm sure you believe that the Roman Empire invaded Israel in 70AD and destroyed her just as Jesus said would happen? And are you not aware of the secular historians who confirm the existance and death of Jesus Christ? No reality in the Bible??

Hey, don't tell me, tell the bible search. Perhaps I should have set it to the result directly:

[Day] Your statement was that nothing in the Bible is true. Regardless what blue letter says, most of the OT is about Israel. Jesus said Rome would invade Jerusalem and secular historians confirm the existance and death of Jesus. Did you still want to make the statement that nothing in the Bible is true?

Source

....and of the Norse deities in fact. You believe in them so much that you reference the days of the week after them. How funny.

[Day] Norse deities had nothing to do with our calendar. Where do you find such nonsense.

Wikipedia would disagree

[Day] Wikipedia???

Come now there is no need to give God more credit than is due. I mean, the bacterial samples actually exist...

[Day] Homosexuals only imagine they exist. And yes, I give credit to God for saying that the lifestyle is an abomination. He said it, believe it.

I'm sorry, but if homosexuals don't exist, then what are you so concerned about?

Absolutes which seem to change depending upon what era you live in.

[Day] Man changes, but God is the same yesterday, today and forever. His commandments are just as binding today as they were back then.

So then I take it that you support the stoning of disobedient children (or perhaps of those who do not "honor their parents")? (Deut. 21:18-21)

[Day] No I do not. These laws were given to Israel under a Theocracy. No nation is under this form of rule, but the Ten Commandments are still binding on everyone.

Or was that not one of your so called 'absolutes'?

[Day] That is no longer an absolute.

[Day] Where does the Bible support slavery?

Ok, but remember, you asked....

Exodus
21:2
If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing.
21:3
If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him.
21:4
If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself.
21:5
And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free:

21:6
Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever.

How to sell your daughter
21:7
And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do.
21:8
If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her.
21:20
And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.
21:21
Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.
22:3
If the sun be risen upon him, there shall be blood shed for him; for he should make full restitution; if he have nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft.

Leviticus:
25:44
Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids.
25:45
Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.
25:46
And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.

Ephesians:
6:5 Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ;

[Day] Ok, so then there never was anything wrong with slavery. Let's bring it back because the Bible says it's not wrong. If slaves were treated the way Paul said to treat them, slavery was not a bad thing. Free room and board, free meals, mutual respect between master and slave. Ask anyone who has no home or job if he would mind working for someone like this. If man treated slaves the way God said to treat them, it would have been a different ball game. Nowhere in any of these verses does it say to mistreat slaves.

[Jose]

That is no longer an absolute.

Let me get this right... It's OK to choose which parts of the Bible to take literally, and which parts to ignore? Who makes the decisions? Can I decide by myself, or do I have to ask someone else to tell me what parts of the Bible are no longer true?

[Daystar]

That is no longer an absolute.

Let me get this right... It's OK to choose which parts of the Bible to take literally, and which parts to ignore? Who makes the decisions? Can I decide by myself, or do I have to ask someone else to tell me what parts of the Bible are no longer true?

[Day] The Mosaic laws are no longer in effect: "The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless (for the law made nothing perfect, and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God." (Heb. 7:18). It's not a question of "who makes the decision" because the New Covenant has set aside the Mosaic laws, which were only binding on Jews. (God did not commit them to the Gentiles). Jeremiah understood this several hundred years before the New Coventant was implemented when he said, "It (the New Covenant) will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers." (Jer. 31:32)

The New Testament provides the conditions by which all men can find forgiveness, regardless how many of God's laws he has broken. Keeping laws is not what God wants from his creation because he knows that no one can keep them without breaking them. If a person is going to find favor with God by keeping his laws, then he must keep all of them without breaking any (Deut. 27:26, Gal. 3:10). All you have to do is break one of God's laws, not have it forgiven, and you have commited your soul to eternal hell. The reason is, God cannot allow sin, even one, in heaven, and the only alternative to heaven is hell.

So if you want to pick which laws you, or someone else says you must obey, then you miss the whole purpose of the new convenant.

"Under law, you live to die; under grace, you die to live."

[perfessor]

[Day] The Mosaic laws are no longer in effect: "The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless (for the law made nothing perfect, and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God." (Heb. 7:18). It's not a question of "who makes the decision" because the New Covenant has set aside the Mosaic laws, which were only binding on Jews. (God did not commit them to the Gentiles). Jeremiah understood this several hundred years before the New Coventant was implemented when he said, "It (the New Covenant) will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers." (Jer. 31:32)

Well, Daystar, it looks like you'll have to stop quoting Leviticus and Deuteronomy, as you have in earlier posts, since those laws are no longer in effect.

Also, I must say that I find your defense of slavery rather disturbing:

If slaves were treated the way Paul said to treat them, slavery was not a bad thing. Free room and board, free meals, mutual respect between master and slave. Ask anyone who has no home or job if he would mind working for someone like this. If man treated slaves the way God said to treat them, it would have been a different ball game.

Ack, I'm going to vomit.

Ask anyone who has no home or job if he would rather have a job at a living wage. And "mutual respect" - ??? Ask yourself honestly, could you respect a master who gave you a job, room and board, but denied you other basic freedoms?? No thanks, I'll take our US Constitution any day.

[dangerdan]

Ok, so then there never was anything wrong with slavery.

Ummm…is that a typo?

So let me get this straight. If we practice slavery the way God wanted us to practice slavery…it would be ok…?

[Corvus]

[Day] Really! I'm sure you don't think that the nation of Israel is a fable and yet half the Bible is about her. And I'm sure you believe that the Roman Empire invaded Israel in 70AD and destroyed her just as Jesus said would happen? And are you not aware of the secular historians who confirm the existance and death of Jesus Christ? No reality in the Bible??

Hey, don't tell me, tell the bible search. Perhaps I should have set it to the result directly:

[Day] Your statement was that nothing in the Bible is true. Regardless what blue letter says, most of the OT is about Israel. Jesus said Rome would invade Jerusalem and secular historians confirm the existance and death of Jesus. Did you still want to make the statement that nothing in the Bible is true?

Source

Enigma was making a very poor joke about how the word reality never occurs in the bible. I only mention it because seeing this still discussed when it has no relevance to anything in the the thread is frustrating.

....and of the Norse deities in fact. You believe in them so much that you reference the days of the week after them. How funny.

[Day] Norse deities had nothing to do with our calendar. Where do you find such nonsense.

He said days of the week, Monsieur Day. Moonday for Monday, Tiw's day for Tuesday, Woden's Day for Wednesday, Thor's Day for Thursday, Frey's Day for Friday, Saturn's Day for Saturday, etc. Three Norse deities and one Roman. The months too are sometimes named after Roman gods. The one that I can call to mind immediately without checking an encyclopedia is January being named after Janus, an obscure god of beginnings.

[Day] Ok, so then there never was anything wrong with slavery. Let's bring it back because the Bible says it's not wrong. If slaves were treated the way Paul said to treat them, slavery was not a bad thing. Free room and board, free meals, mutual respect between master and slave. Ask anyone who has no home or job if he would mind working for someone like this. If man treated slaves the way God said to treat them, it would have been a different ball game. Nowhere in any of these verses does it say to mistreat slaves.

If slavery is fine and dandy, why was a war fought to stop it, instead of simply having it regulated to be kinder on the slaves? (Though many do believe it was fought for economical reasons.) Why not reinstitute it? Is it because people abused the privilege of owning another person, or simply because of that pesky clause in your constitution about pursuit of happiness and liberty?

In actual fact, I am willing to concede that slavery is perfectly okay if it coincides with the will of the slave, and the slave is treated appropriately. But coinciding with the will of the slave is something rare, because the slave normally has no will apart from their master. Slavery isn't voluntary work. But assuming that slavery is perfectly acceptable if the slave does not suffer, as you say, and is based on "mutual understanding" then I really cannot understand why homosexuality is bad if you apply this same sort of reasoning to it.

[TQWcS]

The civil war wasn't faught over slavery. In fact the North continued to use slaves after the Civil war. The reason slavery was done away with was becuase it isn't an efficient means of production. "Slave-labor systems eventually broke down, partly because of the struggles they provoked and partly because economic or other incentives motivate people to produce more effectively than does direct compulsion. Slavery is simply not economically efficient." (Bales 1999)

[Daystar]

Well, Daystar, it looks like you'll have to stop quoting Leviticus and Deuteronomy, as you have in earlier posts, since those laws are no longer in effect.

[Day] Don't need Lev or Deut. because the same prohibitions against homosexuality are found in the new testament. Old, or new, the lifestyle is an abomination.

Also, I must say that I find your defense of slavery rather disturbing:

If slaves were treated the way Paul said to treat them, slavery was not a bad thing. Free room and board, free meals, mutual respect between master and slave. Ask anyone who has no home or job if he would mind working for someone like this. If man treated slaves the way God said to treat them, it would have been a different ball game.

Ack, I'm going to vomit.

[Day] Instead of barfing, why not tell me what is to terrible about treating a slave the way God said. Wouldn't it be a win-win situation for slave and slave owner?

Ask anyone who has no home or job if he would rather have a job at a living wage.

[Day] That's fine too But if a slave has no home or food, what is so terrible about working for someone who will treat him as a human being instead of a the way slaves are normally treated.

And "mutual respect" - ??? Ask yourself honestly, could you respect a master who gave you a job, room and board, but denied you other basic freedoms??

[Day] I don't know what freedoms you have in mind, but if I'm down and out and someone will hire me as their slave, and treat me kindly and justly, I would have no problem.

[Corvus]

The civil war wasn't faught over slavery. In fact the North continued to use slaves after the Civil war. The reason slavery was done away with was becuase it isn't an efficient means of production. "Slave-labor systems eventually broke down, partly because of the struggles they provoked and partly because economic or other incentives motivate people to produce more effectively than does direct compulsion. Slavery is simply not economically efficient." (Bales 1999)

I know. Which is why I added a brief sentence stating that. I didn't wish to divert the thread.