or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Swiss iPhone rumor; BlackBerry Thunder; Apple gay-friendly
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Swiss iPhone rumor; BlackBerry Thunder; Apple gay-friendly - Page 10

post #361 of 426
Not having to actually prove something has always been convenient for religious "no it all's" Just make something up and call it god's will or god's word. Use the bible for the parts you need to condemn someone else of judge them or decide how they should live their lives. If it's not to your liking make it up.

Bible verses that even fundamentalists don't take literally...

Here are some verses which come directly from the Bible that even fundamentalists do not take literally for today, proving that they selectively pick and choose verses out of context which justify their pre-existing prejudice against gay and lesbian people. Take a look for yourself...


"Women should be silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak, but should be submissive, as the law also says." (1 Corinthians 14:34)

This verse says that women can't speak in church. Period. It is completely ignored today. Applying this verse to the modern day church would be ancient, absurd and nonsensical.

When it comes to the verses about homosexuality, however, fundamentalists suddenly insist that they must be interpreted literally, word for word!

When it comes to this verse, however, they admit the facts. They acknowledge that it was only meant for that day. The truth is that the Apostle Paul wrote this verse because, during his time, women and men sat on opposite sides of the church aisle. Women would yell questions across the aisle to their husbands, causing a disruption of the service.

It would be all too easy for a fundamentalist who disliked women to use this verse to exclude women from participating in the service, just as fundamentalists who dislike gay people currently misuse those seemingly anti-gay scriptures to exclude people who are gay.

Realizing that a particular scripture was only relevant for its time (and should not be applied literally to our modern day) is an interpretational option that is conveniently ignored when it comes to the verses which discuss homosexuality.

"Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair it is a disgrace to him, but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her as a covering." (1 Corinthians 11:13-15)

Upon visiting any fundamentalist church, you will discover that more than a few women have short haircuts. This verse, however, indicates that women should have long hair, as their "head must be covered."

It has a familiar ring to it, doesn't it? Arab fundamentalists require women to put a veil over their heads and punish them if they do not. The fact of the matter is that the length of your hair has nothing to do with your spiritual condition.

"If any man takes a wife, and goes in on her, and detests her, and charges her with shameful conduct, and brings a bad name on her, and says, 'I took this woman, and when I came to her I found she was not a virgin..." (Deuteronomy 22:13,14)
"But if ... evidences of virginity are not found for the young woman, then they shall bring out the young woman to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death with stones..." (Deuteronomy 22:20,21)

If a man discovers that a woman is not a virgin on her wedding night, all the men in town can murder her by flinging stones at her young female body as she screams in pain.

Is this the word of God? Hardly.

The command to stone to death a young girl who is not proven to be a virgin on her wedding night is simply an ugly man-made rule of murder that found its way into the Biblical text.

WHY are fundamentalists so afraid to admit the obvious, that such verses like the one listed above are simply not the Word of God? How mature is one's faith if one cannot even admit that a verse which commands that young girls be stoned to death isn't the Word of God?

Here are the facts . . .

The belief in Biblical times was that if a woman was indeed a virgin, she would bleed on her wedding night because her first sexual intercourse would result in the breaking of the hymen, the thin tissue that covers the vagina. This blood was considered the "evidence" of her virginity that the scripture speaks of.

Medical science has since discovered that the hymen is often already broken in many young girls because of their participation in athletic sports and things like horseback riding. Quite tragically, this indicates that many girls who actually were virgins on their wedding night were nonetheless stoned to death because they were ignorant of this scientific fact. Little did many young girls in Biblical times know that their wedding nights would end in their own murder.

"If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched." (Mark 9:43)

While fundamentalists insist (due to their pre-existing bigotry) that all seemingly anti-gay scriptures be taken literally, without exception, they admit that the above verse was not meant to be taken literally even though the words above were spoken by Jesus Himself.

This proves that fundamentalists are willing to say that certain scriptures weren't meant to be believed literally, even those which contain the actual words of Jesus Christ!

"One of illegitimate birth shall not enter the congregation of the Lord." (Deuteronomy 23:2)

If you were born to an unwed mother, the Bible says that you shouldn't be allowed in church. Do "Bible-believing" fundamentalists follow this rule? Nope. They acknowledge that this verse was meant for a different time.

Yes, even fundamentalists acknowledge that certain scriptures were only meant to be applied to the particular time and place in which they were written.

When it comes to those scripture verses which seem to speak against homosexuality, however, they suddenly and indignantly demand that every word be followed to the letter and applied to our modern day!

The idea of refusing membership in the church to a child born to an unwed mother is seen as being unreasonable today, even though the scripture instructs it. The idea of quoting scripture to abuse people who are gay and lesbian is just as unreasonable and antiquated.

"Slaves, obey your human masters with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart, as to Christ." (Ephesians 6:5)

"Slaves, obey your human masters in everything; don't work only while being watched, in order to please men, but work wholeheartedly, fearing the Lord." (Colossians 3:22)

"Slaves are to be submissive to their masters in everything, and to be well-pleasing, not talking back ." (Titus 2:9)

"Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the cruel. " (1 Peter 2:18)

Slaves should obey their masters? Hardly. Slavery was one of the most offensive institutions to ever befall humanity. Sadly, the scriptures condoned it, and, as you can see from the above verses, demanded that slaves obey their masters...even cruel ones. Are those verses the "Word of God?" Of course not. They are merely reflective of cultural biases which found their way into the Biblical text.

Conclusion

When it comes to the scriptural verses which seem to be against homosexuality, fundamentalists boldly declare their belief in the "infallible, inerrant Word of God", demanding that every single word be taken literally, without exception. But when it comes to the awkward verses listed above, they become much less sure of themselves. So much less sure, in fact, that they don't follow what their own Bible says.

Now this is the Word of God . . .

"Jesus said to him, You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets." (Matthew 22:37-40)

The Bible deserves respect if you truly believe in god . . .

We do NOT say these things to disparage the Bible. Far from it, we deeply respect the Bible. We believe that a person is actually greatly disrespecting the Bible if he or she is unwilling to ask tough questions about it. After all, you wouldn't ask tough questions about a comic book, right?

"Test all things; hold fast what is good." (1 Thessalonians 5:21, NKJV)

We believe that the way to respect the Bible is to study it carefully and with a sobriety of mind that should be common amongst people who want to understand God's will for our lives.
The Bible is greatly disrespected when it is used to justify anti-gay prejudice. The Bible was never intended to be used as a weapon of intolerance against people who are gay or lesbian. The time has come for the church to put a stop to that sin.
Mac Pro Dual 3GHz Intel Core Duo and 30" Display, 15" Mac Book Pro, iPhone 4, iPad 64 3G 64
Reply
Mac Pro Dual 3GHz Intel Core Duo and 30" Display, 15" Mac Book Pro, iPhone 4, iPad 64 3G 64
Reply
post #362 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

What you don't realize is that to your brother, that means they don't accept him. At all. And that's all that matters.

I'm so sorry that your parents are torn up about this. If they just stop listening to the church and do what they know is right (to simply love their son and allow him his own choices and support him in them), they won't have that pressure.

You have interpreted the Bible the way someone told you to interpret it. The way you have been intoctrinated to believe it is to be interpreted.

It's interesting that you criticize me when I say that my brother's homosexuality was a choice (he had a girlfriend, got into the 'furry' business, then became gay). But now you say you know my parents' consciences, and that their consciences were 'indoctrinated' by the church. Do you know my parents? Have you talked to them?
post #363 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by iHarry View Post

Bible verses that even fundamentalists don't take literally...

Here are some verses which come directly from the Bible that even fundamentalists do not take literally for today, proving that they selectively pick and choose verses out of context which justify their pre-existing prejudice against gay and lesbian people. Take a look for yourself...


"Women should be silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak, but should be submissive, as the law also says." (1 Corinthians 14:34)

This verse says that women can't speak in church. Period. It is completely ignored today. Applying this verse to the modern day church would be ancient, absurd and nonsensical.

When it comes to the verses about homosexuality, however, fundamentalists suddenly insist that they must be interpreted literally, word for word!

Actually, some churches do hold to that teaching, and women don't talk during the service. I've heard about an Assembly of God church in the area that holds to that rule.


Regarding biblical interpretation, let me bring up the Levitical rule about not eating shellfish as part of the kosher rules.

Jesus said, "Don't you see that nothing that enters a man from the outside can make him 'unclean'?For it doesn't go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body." (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean.")

For a time God had the Jews practice certian rules, like not eating shellfish, or not wearing material of multiple materials. Then he modified those rules later on. It's like your children -- you have certain rule that you give a 5-year-old, and they don't apply anymore to a 15-year-old. Likewise, God started with Israel as a theocracy, and gave them special rules to make them pure and holy compared to the nations around them. Later on, when his plan broadened to the Gentiles (non-Jews), he moved to the next phase of his plan. Some of those laws that were to teach the Jews holiness and separateness were no longer needed.

However, the broadening of certain rules by God does not mean we can broaden other rules that he didn't broaden. Homosexuality is a sin from Genesis to Revelation. There's a difference between cleanliness rules (i.e. kosher rules) and rules that are core to our very being (i.e. the fact that we are male and female for a reason.)
post #364 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

Actually, some churches do hold to that teaching, and women don't talk during the service. I've heard about an Assembly of God church in the area that holds to that rule.


Regarding biblical interpretation, let me bring up the Levitical rule about not eating shellfish as part of the kosher rules.

Jesus said, "Don't you see that nothing that enters a man from the outside can make him 'unclean'?For it doesn't go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body." (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean.")

For a time God had the Jews practice certian rules, like not eating shellfish, or not wearing material of multiple materials. Then he modified those rules later on. It's like your children -- you have certain rule that you give a 5-year-old, and they don't apply anymore to a 15-year-old. Likewise, God started with Israel as a theocracy, and gave them special rules to make them pure and holy compared to the nations around them. Later on, when his plan broadened to the Gentiles (non-Jews), he moved to the next phase of his plan. Some of those laws that were to teach the Jews holiness and separateness were no longer needed.

However, the broadening of certain rules by God does not mean we can broaden other rules that he didn't broaden. Homosexuality is a sin from Genesis to Revelation. There's a difference between cleanliness rules (i.e. kosher rules) and rules that are core to our very being (i.e. the fact that we are male and female for a reason.)

Like I said, selective faith. You refuse to address all of the silly stories told in the bible. You just stick with the ones that serve your purpose. Midless! So ask yourself:


"What would Jesus do?"

During his earthly ministry . . .
\tJesus never called a gay person a sinner.
\tJesus never called a gay person immoral.
\tJesus never asked a gay person to change.
\tJesus never condemned a single gay person.
\tJesus never judged a single gay person.
\tJesus never quoted scripture against a single gay person.
Mac Pro Dual 3GHz Intel Core Duo and 30" Display, 15" Mac Book Pro, iPhone 4, iPad 64 3G 64
Reply
Mac Pro Dual 3GHz Intel Core Duo and 30" Display, 15" Mac Book Pro, iPhone 4, iPad 64 3G 64
Reply
post #365 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

he had a girlfriend, got into the 'furry' business, then became gay

Your brother was born homosexual.
Your brother tried heterosexuality because of social pressures but it did not work out.
Your brother has a furry fetish.
Your brother met a guy in a furry convention. They fell in love with each other.
You can not stand that your brother is happily living his life with his partner while you are on your own struggling with your own sexuality.
post #366 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Londor View Post

Your brother was born homosexual.
Your brother tried heterosexuality because of social pressures but it did not work out.
Your brother has a furry fetish.
Your brother met a guy in a furry convention. They fell in love with each other.
You can not stand that your brother is happily living his life with his partner while you are on your own struggling with your own sexuality.

Shhhh.... for godsakes, don't tell him the truth!

Can't you see frug is happy living in his own private State of Denial?


,
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
post #367 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBaggins View Post

Shhhh.... for godsakes, don't tell him the truth!

Can't you see frug is happy living in his own private State of Denial?


,

Well it's also possible (likely) his brother was born bisexual, leaning either way. He just happened to find that the person he ultimately fell in love with and stayed in love with, who fulfilled his needs and made him happy, was a man. Being recently married to the love of my life, I know how this discovery can feel.

Regardless, he didn't "turn" gay. His behaviour might have, but not his sexuality. His sexuality, be it gay, or bisexual, he was most definitely born with.

The problem here is with people who are born gay, or bisexual leaning toward gay, and because of social pressures attempt to live as heterosexuals. These are the people whose lives are destroyed by social and religious pressure. These are the people whose parents disown them, or don't "approve" of their choices (which means they don't approve of them at all). These are the people, just like Frugal's bro, who are much more likely to commit suicide.

If my parents refused to "approve" of my wife, being an independent soul, I would be hurt but not suicidal, and I would choose love and my future over birth and my past. Hopefully that's the way Frugal's bro dealt with it, and he's not devastated by his parents' rejection, instead concentrating on his and his lover's happiness. God bless them.
post #368 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

A few years ago my brother announced to the family that he was a 'furry'; someone who likes to dress up as a fox or bear or hedgehog or whatever, and hang out at furry conventions and online. Then a year later he announced he was gay, and was moving in with his furry partner.

My parents were worried about the furry business, and thought it was weird and disturbing. They didn't know that only 25% of furries are heterosexual. When he came out of the closet, my parents were shocked and saddened. They still are to this day, something like 5 years later. The two of them have been welcome at family gatherings, but the homosexuality or furriness have not been accepted as O.K. We can't consider his partner as family, yet they have been invited and have come to family Christmas get-togethers. My parents don't allow them to sleep together in the same room of their house, so they choose to stay at a hotel. Lately, though, they haven't been attending family get-togethers.

It's conceivable that he could commit suicide. It's not what we want or what anyone wants. However, we can't change God's rules and say that homosexuality is O.K. No parent wants their child to commit suicide. But at the same time, each of us has been given free will by God. The choice to put a gun to your head or to down a bottle of pills is a personal choice.

At a certain point, when a child does things that shouldn't be done, the parent has to let the child go. For the parents to disobey God, too, would be adding to the wrongs.

My parents' hearts are still broken to this day. They've pretty much lost their son. But there is one who has higher power, and they can't go against him even for the sake of their own son.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Londor View Post

Your brother was born homosexual.
Your brother tried heterosexuality because of social pressures but it did not work out.
Your brother has a furry fetish.
Your brother met a guy in a furry convention. They fell in love with each other.
You can not stand that your brother is happily living his life with his partner while you are on your own struggling with your own sexuality.

Exactly. Frugal's brother was born gay. And Frugal's brother has chosen to be a man and stand up for what he is--by sticking by his boyfriend/partner and sticking to his guns (staying at a hotel to avoid his parents' stupid rules, and lately avoiding the family altogether).

OTOH, Frugal has chosen to hide behind the bible, rather than stand up for himself like a man. Sad, really.
post #369 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by hezekiahb View Post

Add on to this matter the fact that many religious groups do not agree that homosexuality is acceptable in their ranks but now you want a law saying they aren't allowed to fire someone based on orientation. Congrats, you just violated separation of church & state, the government is now dictating religion.

I'm over simplifying a bit but I think you get the point.

Sorry but you get it wrong here. If we were to follow your logic by being separate the government would have to let some Muslim extremist group cut the hand of the (accused) thief, or a Christian extremist group stone a woman (accused) for infidelity.

It is the opposite, the government sets the rules independently of religious beliefs and all law-abiding citizens are to follow them, whether it is in accordance with their religious opinions or not.
-- Denis.
Reply
-- Denis.
Reply
post #370 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by iHarry View Post

Like I said, selective faith. You refuse to address all of the silly stories told in the bible. You just stick with the ones that serve your purpose. Midless! So ask yourself:


"What would Jesus do?"

During his earthly ministry . . .
\tJesus never called a gay person a sinner.
\tJesus never called a gay person immoral.
\tJesus never asked a gay person to change.
\tJesus never condemned a single gay person.
\tJesus never judged a single gay person.
\tJesus never quoted scripture against a single gay person.

You need to preface that with "the bible doesn't record Jesus as having said..."

Also note that Jesus never said anything that contradicted scripture. If he wanted to say that homosexuality was O.K. now (where it wasn't before), he could have. However, an argument of silence is not implied acceptance. He never contradicted the bible. He did point out where one rule was more important than another. For example, in the case of the good Samaritan, the Priest and the Levite were both 'in the right' not to touch the almost-dead, beat-up guy, because Leviticus forbid them to touch a dead body or blood, lest they should become unclean. But Jesus' point was that 'love your neighbor' is more important than the 'don't touch blood' or 'don't touch a dead body' rules.

Jesus hung out with sinners like prostitutes. He came to show them a better way, not to accept their adultery as being O.K. If Jesus was here today, he'd be hanging out with homosexuals, but he wouldn't be condoning their behavior.
post #371 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Londor View Post

Your brother was born homosexual.
Your brother tried heterosexuality because of social pressures but it did not work out.
Your brother has a furry fetish.
Your brother met a guy in a furry convention. They fell in love with each other.
You can not stand that your brother is happily living his life with his partner while you are on your own struggling with your own sexuality.

Jealous? Not in the least. Questioning my heterosexuality? Not in the least. Funny how you think you know me better than I know myself.

I risk saddening my Father in heaven if I do things against his plan for me. And I make things worse for myself if I go my own way, too. I'd only be making things worse for myself by having sex with someone who's not my wife, and I haven't met her yet. God has given me encouragement that it will happen on his timing, though.
post #372 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by bikertwin View Post

Exactly. Frugal's brother was born gay. And Frugal's brother has chosen to be a man and stand up for what he is--by sticking by his boyfriend/partner and sticking to his guns (staying at a hotel to avoid his parents' stupid rules, and lately avoiding the family altogether).

OTOH, Frugal has chosen to hide behind the bible, rather than stand up for himself like a man. Sad, really.

I used to be STRONGLY agnostic and very pro-gay. I grew up in Madison, WI, which is a very liberal town and has a large gay population. I was interested in any religion BUT Christianity. I was learning about all the other major religions, and had a certain draw towards Native American beliefs.

But someone challenged me to read 'The Case for Christ'. And that, coupled with God's own personal intervention in my life, convinced me that the God of the bible was real.

Understand, I didn't become a Christian because I wanted to. I didn't 'choose to hide behind the bible'. I was shown that God really is God, and everything else in my life changed at that moment, against my own desires.
post #373 of 426
"Against your own desires"?

That's exactly what I mean when I say that your brother stood up for his life, and you "sacrificed" yours to religion. That's a total cop-out.

It sounds like you've had (have?) a terrible life. I feel sorry for you. Life sucks. It truly does. But don't use the excuse of someone (or some book) "forcing your hand" so to speak: your life is what you make of it.
post #374 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by bikertwin View Post

"Against your own desires"

The point was that I didn't want God. But he showed me himself, and made me an offer I couldn't refuse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bikertwin View Post

It sounds like you've had (have?) a terrible life. I feel sorry for you. Life sucks. It truly does. But don't use the excuse of someone (or some book) "forcing your hand" so to speak: your life is what you make of it.

My life got markedly better after getting to know him. Now I have hope, and a future. As the old hymn says, "He walks with me and He talks with me, and He tells me I am his own; and the joy we share as we tarry there, none other has ever known."

My life is not what I make of it, its what He makes of it. His plans are better than ours.
post #375 of 426
apparently there's a 3G iphone in the works!!!!!
post #376 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality's brother View Post

The point was that I didn't want to be gay. But my lover showed me myself, and made me an offer I couldn't refuse: I fell in love.

My life got markedly better after getting to know him. Now I have hope, and a future. As the old hymn says, "He walks with me and He talks with me, and He tells me I am his own; and the joy we share as we tarry there, none other has ever known."

My life is not what I make of it, its what love makes of it. Love's plans are better than ours.

Another perspective.
post #377 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

You need to preface that with "the bible doesn't record Jesus as having said..."

He never contradicted the bible. He did point out where one rule was more important than another.

Maybe that's because the bible didn't first appear until 400 years AFTER the crucifixion. But I see your back to quoting Leviticus even though you Leviticus was "harsh" and not meant to be followed. What a phony.
Mac Pro Dual 3GHz Intel Core Duo and 30" Display, 15" Mac Book Pro, iPhone 4, iPad 64 3G 64
Reply
Mac Pro Dual 3GHz Intel Core Duo and 30" Display, 15" Mac Book Pro, iPhone 4, iPad 64 3G 64
Reply
post #378 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Another perspective.

Realize that that is an earthy perspective. From a heavenly perspective, it's a poor choice to reject God for a lower form of love. It has eternal consequences.
post #379 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by iHarry View Post

Maybe that's because the bible didn't first appear until 400 years AFTER the crucifixion. But I see your back to quoting Leviticus even though you Leviticus was "harsh" and not meant to be followed. What a phony.

The bible of Jesus' day, the Hebrew bible (what Christians call the Old Testament), was intact before Jesus. It started ~1500BC with Moses writing the Torah, and various other history, wisdom, and prophetic books were added through the centuries, but the Hebrew bible was complete before Jesus' time. The New Testament was collected and added after Jesus' time.

I never said Leviticus was not meant to be followed. When Jesus said, "Love your neighbor as yourself," he was quoting Leviticus. Jesus also said, "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. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." That would include Leviticus. The question is not WHETHER to follow it, but HOW to follow it.
post #380 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

Realize that that is an earthy perspective. From a heavenly perspective, it's a poor choice to reject God for a lower form of love. It has eternal consequences.

So if you really, really think that God is the wrathful, vengeful tyrant you've grown to know from the Old Obsolete Testament, let your brother face Him when that moment arrives. Just don't try to take away from your brother that earthly love that makes him most happy, and failing that, take away the support and respect of a mother, father and brother that he probably also loved quite a lot and is heartbroken to have lost.
post #381 of 426
Really, Frugality, you really have no right talking about real romantic and sexual love when you've never experienced it. Once you feel it, you will know.



I really hope that everyone here can experience peace and love.
post #382 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Really, Frugality, you really have no right talking about real romantic and sexual love when you've never experienced it. Once you feel it, you will know.

I really hope that everyone here can experience peace and love.

Once you've experienced God's love, you will know it. And you will know that it is better than human love -- heterosexual, or (if you unfortunately sink to that level) otherwise.

I assume that's you and your wife in that picture. Would you be O.K. with her having an affair? Would you be O.K. with her leaving you for another man? Would you be O.K. with her leaving you for a woman?

You brought up the Old Testament, and how you perceive God as harsh. There is a beautiful thread that runs through the Old Testament, and that is the picture of us being married to God. As Israel worshipped the false gods of the nations around them, God referred to them as being an adulterous wife, and himself as the faithful husband. You may recall God saying, "I, your God, am a jealous God." That is becuase he loves us. He loves us enough that he doesn't want us to hurt our relationship with sin. You wouldn't want your wife cheating on you and driving a wedge in your relationship. Likewise, God simply wants us to be faithful to him. And he returns the favor by being faithful to us, more than we deserve.
post #383 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

Once you've experienced God's love, you will know it. And you will know that it is better than human love -- heterosexual, or (if you unfortunately sink to that level) otherwise.

I assume that's you and your wife in that picture. Would you be O.K. with her having an affair? Would you be O.K. with her leaving you for another man? Would you be O.K. with her leaving you for a woman?


frugality....ive kept my quiet throughout this thread, but your posts make me very sad. to go thru ur whole life without human companionship must be very....lonely.

truly tho, i do hope that u find someone to share your life with, outside of someone you read about in a book. but then again...u seem completely happy living alone, so odds are thats how you will die.
post #384 of 426
It is clear now that frugality has serious mental issues. There is no point trying to have a discussion with him until he gets those issues addressed.
post #385 of 426
Honestly,guys, quit beating on Frugality. He is standing up for his position as a Christian, and you guys keep shooting him down for it. Christians like him (or me, for that matter) believe that homosexual marriage is fundamentally wrong. The rest of you don't. End of story.
17" i7 Macbook Pro (Mid 2010), Mac Mini (early 2006), G3 B&W, G3 Beige Tower, 3 G3 iMacs (original, bondi, snow), Power Mac 7600/132, Power Mac 7100/100, Power Mac 6100/60, Performa 5280, Performa...
Reply
17" i7 Macbook Pro (Mid 2010), Mac Mini (early 2006), G3 B&W, G3 Beige Tower, 3 G3 iMacs (original, bondi, snow), Power Mac 7600/132, Power Mac 7100/100, Power Mac 6100/60, Performa 5280, Performa...
Reply
post #386 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by JakeTheRock View Post

Honestly,guys, quit beating on Frugality. He is standing up for his position as a Christian, and you guys keep shooting him down for it. Christians like him (or me, for that matter) believe that homosexual marriage is fundamentally wrong. The rest of you don't. End of story.

It's not just that he says homosexual marriage is wrong. He says homosexuality itself is wrong.

To turn your statement around, we could say, "Atheists like Joe (or me, for that matter) believe that Christianity is fundamentally wrong. End of story." Would you leave a statement like that uncontested if you are a Christian?

The irony, of course, is that religion is a choice, but sexual orientation isn't.

And if you think religion isn't a choice, why do you have to get baptized or christened if you're born Christian? On the other hand, you don't have to "join" or "prove" your homosexuality--you're born that way.
post #387 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by bikertwin View Post

It's not just that he says homosexual marriage is wrong. He says homosexuality itself is wrong.

Yes, that is a correct assesment of what I'm saying.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bikertwin View Post

The irony, of course, is that religion is a choice, but sexual orientation isn't.

Some people are attracted to the opposite sex. The choice is whether to act on those urges or not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bikertwin View Post

And if you think religion isn't a choice, why do you have to get baptized or christened if you're born Christian? On the other hand, you don't have to "join" or "prove" your homosexuality--you're born that way.

Religion is most definitely a choice. We must choose to accept or reject God, who gave us the free will to do so. Baptism is something that is not necessary (consider that the theif hanging on the cross next to Jesus didn't get the chance to be baptized, yet Jesus said, "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise"), however we are told that we are to be baptized, as an outward expression of our decision.

Everyone has the choice to follow any other religion, but they will all be dead-ends. All religions at their core contradict each other, so they all claim exclusivity (even the inclusivists like Baha'is exclude the exclusivists.) All religions may be false, but no more than one can be true.

Again, you may be born with urges that are unacceptable to act upon. I am a man who has urges to have sex with a woman. Yet since I haven't met the right woman yet, I am still a virgin. You are under the same rules as I am. No sex outside of a manogamous marital relationship with someone of the opposite sex.
post #388 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfpants View Post

frugality....ive kept my quiet throughout this thread, but your posts make me very sad. to go thru ur whole life without human companionship must be very....lonely.

truly tho, i do hope that u find someone to share your life with, outside of someone you read about in a book. but then again...u seem completely happy living alone, so odds are thats how you will die.

The good thing is that God doesn't play by odds, and he doesn't expect us to, either. He expects us to trust him when the odds are stacked against us. The odds of me finding a nice, sweet, cute, Jesus Freak chick are slim if you go by odds. In fact, they're even slimmer since I gave up searching for her and am praying and waiting. I'll come back and re-post on this thread when God brings her into my life.

Once I was praying about this and felt God clearly say, "Are you going to trust Me with her?" This doesn't necessarily mean he has someone for me for sure, but it does seem to imply that there will be a 'her' at some point. So I trust, and leave it up to him.
post #389 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

Yes, that is a correct assesment of what I'm saying.

Some people are attracted to the opposite sex. The choice is whether to act on those urges or not.

Religion is most definitely a choice.

Well, I'm glad I've understood you correctly--and finally we find something to agree on: religion is a choice. And we agree that it is a choice on whether to act on homosexuality or not (just as it's a choice whether to act on heterosexuality or not).

I've chosen to abandon any "Christian" religion--or any other religion--that says that my natural instinct (homosexuality) is wrong.

My boyfriend & I do nothing sexually to each other that the other person doesn't enjoy.

What does this mean for me? It means that I am a very happy guy! I'm dating a wonderful man. We kiss and cuddle and hug; we smile a lot; we have deep conversations & debates about many topics (he's more conservative; I'm more liberal); we spend all our free time together; we have jobs and pay taxes; we visit friends & family; we have picnics in the park; go biking & hiking; educate ourselves at museums & occasional night classes; donate money to good causes; volunteer for good causes.

What does this mean for society?

We are, in short, like any other well-adjusted, healthy (physically & mentally), successful, moral, upstanding, community-minded couple.
post #390 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Londor View Post

It is clear now that frugality has serious mental issues. There is no point trying to have a discussion with him until he gets those issues addressed.

It is interesting that Christians (no, Londor, Christianity is not a "religion") do not dismiss your thoughts with accusations of mental illness, stupidity, or epithets. Whereas you, in an attempt to denigrate the beliefs of another insist that the person who simply believes differently from you must have a mental problem. Even though I disagree with your beliefs, I see not point in insulting you. Can you, in turn, afford the same courtesy to others?
SkyKing
Reply
SkyKing
Reply
post #391 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sky King View Post

It is interesting that Christians (no, Londor, Christianity is not a "religion") do not dismiss your thoughts with accusations of mental illness, stupidity, or epithets. Whereas you, in an attempt to denigrate the beliefs of another insist that the person who simply believes differently from you must have a mental problem. Even though I disagree with your beliefs, I see not point in insulting you. Can you, in turn, afford the same courtesy to others?

Anyone claiming to have an imaginary friend who presents to him, talks to him and tells him what to do has serious mental issues whether you call that imaginary friend god, Captain Hook or whatever.

And no matter how much makeup you want to put on it, Christianity is a religion.

religion |rɪˈlɪdʒ(ə)n|
noun
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods
post #392 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Londor View Post

Anyone claiming to have an imaginary friend who presents to him, talks to him and tells him what to do has serious mental issues whether you call that imaginary friend god, Captain Hook or whatever.

By saying that, you've already ruled out the potential of God's existence even before you begin. To say that you know for sure that God can't talk to us, you would have to be omnipotent.

The argument for homosexuality here seems to have been, "if it feels natural, it is natural." Can we apply the same thing here? If it feels natural to talk to God, that can't be a mental issue. Homosexuality was redefined as normal by the stroke of a pen. We can do the same for God, can't we?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Londor View Post

And no matter how much makeup you want to put on it, Christianity is a religion.

I would agree with that statement as the normal definition of religion. I wonder, though, if Sky King was implying that Christianity is Truth, whereas other 'religions' are false, and I would agree with that. In that case, Christianity isn't religion as such, it's walking the true path, it's a way of being. Sort of in the same way Buddhists refer to enlightenment, a state of being rather than merely a bunch of rules and regulations.

There's a song on Christian radio stations that's about heaven, and it has a line that goes, "There's a place where religion finally dies." It means that when we get to heaven, we'll be seeing God in all his glory, face to face. Whereas now we only hear his voice now and then, see his hand moving in events in our lives, etc., the vagueness will be gone. He will be totally revealed. Religion will be unnecessary, since religion is a framework for belief based partly on evidence and partly on faith. That framework won't be needed when we are in the very presence of God himself. He will be fully evident.
post #393 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by bikertwin View Post

What does this mean for society?

We are, in short, like any other well-adjusted, healthy (physically & mentally), successful, moral, upstanding, community-minded couple.

The bigger question is: What does this mean for God? Society's definition, or your or my own personal definition of 'well-adjusted, healthy, successful, moral, upstanding' doesn't matter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bikertwin View Post

I've chosen to abandon any "Christian" religion--or any other religion--that says that my natural instinct (homosexuality) is wrong.

Not everything that is an urge is acceptable to God, but he gave you free will, including the option of rejecting him.
post #394 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

By saying that, you've already ruled out the potential of God's existence even before you begin. To say that you know for sure that God can't talk to us, you would have to be omnipotent.

You just keep proving time and time again that among other things your grasp of the language is pretty poor. Omnipotent is not the same as having universal knowledge.

omnipotent |ɒmˈnɪpət(ə)nt|
adjective
(of a deity) having unlimited power

But when you say you are in possession of the "Truth" it must be because you have universal knowledge and that is obviously not the case.

Anyway I, unlike you, am open to any possibility. I approach everything with an open mind so come up with the goods and show the world substantial evidence that demonstrates the existence of a superhuman being who is the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority and then not only I but everyone will acknowledge it. Until that moment arrives what you are saying has to be considered as nothing more than a fairy tale, a product of your and other people's imagination.

Whilst having imaginary friends per se is not classified as having a mental disorder when you fail to understand that they are not real and interfere with your everyday life they become a problem that should be looked at by a mental health professional.

Quote:
The argument for homosexuality here seems to have been, "if it feels natural, it is natural." Can we apply the same thing here? If it feels natural to talk to God, that can't be a mental issue. Homosexuality was redefined as normal by the stroke of a pen. We can do the same for God, can't we?

You have to be pretty thick to use the same argument that was used by those who defend what you consider fundamentally wrong to support your case because by doing that you are in fact legitimising what you thought was wrong which is an utter contradiction on your part.
post #395 of 426
Frugality.

Earlier you made a revealing statement. That your personal circumstances were improved when you firmly adopted this christian belief system. It gave you comfort and a sense of completeness.

That, right there, is your reason.

Religiosity is commonplace. All over the world, and all through time people have believed in supernatural companions of one sort or another. It's almost universal.

Weather and nature spirits explained the animated and troublesome aspects of nature.
Inventive human minds evolved these ideas into increasingly more sophisticated representations.
The Romans and Greeks had a sort of soap opera of the skies. With a collection of popular characters. The Norse and Indian pantheons are similar.

And the Abrahamic religions refined this even more with fewer gods.

Christians say they are down to just the one. ( although many also believe in a second minor deity called the "devil". Who appears to be possess many godlike attributes.)

Truth is like mathematics. The square root of 25 is the same all over the world. It's the same in the past and in the future.
Religion is more like popular drinks. Here it's tea. There it's beer. And every liquid is a different strength served in a different container.

So where's the universal truth?

Religiosity driven by human need. All humans share ....

A Fear of death.
B Anger at injustice.
C Confusion at the rather brutal character of Nature and the Universe.
D Fear of loneliness.

These are natural human reactions to their existence. And because we have evolved a potent imagination, it allows us to invent solutions. We imagine supernatural creatures, who...

A Keep us alive after we die.
B Right all wrongs.
C Have dominion over nature.
D Provide permanent, loving companionship.

Each culture constructs its own solution. There are no universal beliefs, but there are quite universal human frailties providing the fuel.

For you, I am sure, the solution works. It's a highly-sophisticated fantasy. It well-engineered self-deception. Done properly, it makes you happy with your life.

But for me, a lie, however sweet it is, however good it makes you feel, is still a lie. My conscience just won't let me buy into it. My genome didn't make me that way.

C.
post #396 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Londor View Post

Anyone claiming to have an imaginary friend who presents to him, talks to him and tells him what to do has serious mental issues whether you call that imaginary friend god, Captain Hook or whatever.

Look, I take serious offense to the fact that you blow me and everyone else who has a religion as someone with "Seious mental issues." I would like to politely ask you to shut the FUCK up. You have no place to tell me that what I believe is wrong, or that i am just suffering from serious delusions. You seem to be asking Christians to be accepting of homosexuals, yet you can't find it in you to be accepting of Christians. So stop being an asshole about this whole thing. Let me see how clear I can be.

1. Christians (and a few other religions) belive that homosexualtiy/homosexual marraige is wrong.

2. Other people don't.

3. These debates will likely never be solved.

There is no reason that this thread should be this long. I would ask that moderators close this thread.
17" i7 Macbook Pro (Mid 2010), Mac Mini (early 2006), G3 B&W, G3 Beige Tower, 3 G3 iMacs (original, bondi, snow), Power Mac 7600/132, Power Mac 7100/100, Power Mac 6100/60, Performa 5280, Performa...
Reply
17" i7 Macbook Pro (Mid 2010), Mac Mini (early 2006), G3 B&W, G3 Beige Tower, 3 G3 iMacs (original, bondi, snow), Power Mac 7600/132, Power Mac 7100/100, Power Mac 6100/60, Performa 5280, Performa...
Reply
post #397 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by JakeTheRock View Post

1. Christians (and a few other religions) belive that homosexualtiy/homosexual marraige is wrong.

There are a number of segments of Christianity and Christians that don't share that belief.
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
post #398 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by JakeTheRock View Post

Look, I take serious offense to the fact that you blow me and everyone else who has a religion as someone with "Seious mental issues." I would like to politely ask you to shut the FUCK up. You have no place to tell me that what I believe is wrong, or that i am just suffering from serious delusions. You seem to be asking Christians to be accepting of homosexuals, yet you can't find it in you to be accepting of Christians. So stop being an asshole about this whole thing. Let me see how clear I can be.

1. Christians (and a few other religions) belive that homosexualtiy/homosexual marraige is wrong.

2. Other people don't.

3. These debates will likely never be solved.

There is no reason that this thread should be this long. I would ask that moderators close this thread.

Um... you didn't read what he said. By no means did he call "everyone who has a religion" anything. Just the ones who claim that God communicates directly to them using more than just their imagination.
post #399 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by JakeTheRock View Post

You have no place to tell me that what I believe is wrong, or that i am just suffering from serious delusions. You seem to be asking Christians to be accepting of homosexuals, yet you can't find it in you to be accepting of Christians. So stop being an asshole about this whole thing. Let me see how clear I can be.

1. Christians (and a few other religions) belive that homosexualtiy/homosexual marraige is wrong.

So according to you I have no place to tell you what you believe is wrong (something I have never done) but you can tell people how they have to live their lives, how wrong and disgusting their behaviour is and how they are gonna burn in hell for their sins. Give me a break.

If you choose to believe then that is up to you and I respect your beliefs but religion is a personal thing so keep it to yourself and shut the fuck up.

And read the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th Edition Text Revision) and you will find out that as I said anyone claiming to have an imaginary friend who presents to him/her, talks to him/her and tells him/her what to do is considered to have serious mental issues.
post #400 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Londor View Post

So according to you I have no place to tell you what you believe is wrong (something I have never done) but you can tell people how they have to live their lives, how wrong and disgusting their behaviour is and how they are gonna burn in hell for their sins. Give me a break.

EDIT: Heh, well I guess I did say that, but I meant more of:
No, I said you have no place to say that me or anyone else who believe in a religion is mentally ill. And you did say that.

Now, when have I ever said that anyone will burn in hell? All I said was that I believe that that homosexual marriage is wrong.

Many denominations of Christianity agree that sexual orientation is not a choice. However, I, as well as several denominations of Christianity believe that acting on it is wrong, because, according to Christians, marriage is defined as a union between a man and a woman, and Christians believe that having sexual intercourse before marriage is wrong.


Quote:
And read the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th Edition Text Revision) and you will find out that as I said anyone claiming to have an imaginary friend who presents to him/her, talks to him/her and tells him/her what to do is considered to have serious mental issues.

Ok, Christians do not have an "imagninary friend" in their head that speaks to them. God guides our actions indirectly, and communicates indirectly. When someone says that they "talked to God" it is more of a metaphore for a deeper experience then a simple conversation.

If you are going to put down any group for any reason, first know what you are talking about.
17" i7 Macbook Pro (Mid 2010), Mac Mini (early 2006), G3 B&W, G3 Beige Tower, 3 G3 iMacs (original, bondi, snow), Power Mac 7600/132, Power Mac 7100/100, Power Mac 6100/60, Performa 5280, Performa...
Reply
17" i7 Macbook Pro (Mid 2010), Mac Mini (early 2006), G3 B&W, G3 Beige Tower, 3 G3 iMacs (original, bondi, snow), Power Mac 7600/132, Power Mac 7100/100, Power Mac 6100/60, Performa 5280, Performa...
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Swiss iPhone rumor; BlackBerry Thunder; Apple gay-friendly