What Jesus says about homosexuality?

Hahahaha pun not intended I assume?

 

Correct! Good catch!

- - - Updated - - -

It's all in the intent, dear. . .look within yourself, and you'll know. That is, if you are honest with yourself!

 

The reality is that Jesus never said a word about homosexuality. No ifs ands or buts, period, end of discussion.

 

Again I ask...where exactly did I state that homosexuals DESERVE to suffer excruciating torture for eternity? You really like to make stuff up, and try to put words in my mouth in an attempt to wrongfully make me look bad, but, unfortunately for you, once again, you have failed. I did not create the law, nor did I write the scriptures, I am simply stating what the Bible says regarding homosexuality through out both old and new testaments. Now if you choose to disregard Gods law that is between you and God, If you choose to cherry pick the scriptures that make you feel all warm and fuzzy and pretend that the others don't exist, well that is also between you and God......

 

The reality is that Jesus never said a word about pedophilia. No ifs ands or buts, period, end of discussion.

 

Considering the 'example' set by the Savior, there are surely too many "Christians" today, who have appointed themselves as judge, jury (and sometimes literal executioner) of homosexual people.

And that is where we need to focus attention, to make the more important corrections (even spiritually); the hypocrisy (of many calling themselves "Christian") is absolutely damning.

 

Please show me exactly where I've been judgemental (in a salvation sense), or hypocritical. I also ask that you go back to my first post in this thread (#164) to get a brief summary of how I feel regarding homosexuality and biblical scripture.

 

Let me ask you this sadanie, do you tend to disregard or disagree with all of the old testament or just the parts that you don't like?
And on the flip side of that, do you stand strong on all the teachings of Jesus Christ or just the ones that you agree with?

 

Nah, anything you people cant deal with you claim to be irrelevant.

 

Actually Ive repeatedly pointed out that Loving v Virginia was right. Race has no rational relation to the governmental interest in improving the well being of children. Interracial couples procreate just like same race couples. And purifying the white race is not a legitimate governmental interest.
You people cant deal with what I actually state, so you busy yourselves making up (*)(*)(*)(*) you can deal with and attributing it to me.

 

No, it really is irrelevant. Just like procreation is irrelevant to who can marry.

- - - Updated - - -

Procreation is irrelevant to who can marry

 

I wasn't talking about YOU, per se. Come on, be reasonable.

 

Who are you referring to by saying, "...you people..."?

And people aren't going to repeatedly regard someone's illogical, nonsensical or irrelevant views.

If you can't deal with that, then you either drop the issue and live as you see fit... or find another way to convince people.

- - - Updated - - -

Amen to that.

 

Nope, incest is irrelevant to same-sex marriage just like it is irrelevant to interracial marriage.

 

You claim that allowing same gender couples to marry is discrimination, because incestious couples couples cannot be legally married.

In Loving v. Virginia, opposite color couples were being discriminated against- and that discrimination was ended- and you claim to agree with that. But of course incestious couples still couldn't get married- a grandfather couldn't marry his granddaughter- who could as you say it 'procreate just like same race couples'. By your argument that grandfather and granddaughter were being discriminated against when Virginia v. Loving was decideded.

But of course they were not- Virginia v. Loving made marriage less discriminatory.

Your argument is hypocritical and merely a rationalization for continuing to discriminate against same gender couples.

Legalizing same gender marriage makes marriage less discriminatory. Anyone who gave a crap about equal rights would recognize that.

 

Its amazing, after all this time, you still haven't yet even begun to comprehend my argument. Discrimination is judged under our constitution in relation to the governmental interest served. Race has no rational relation to the governmental interest in improving the well being of children that only heterosexual couples produce. While the opposite genders of the couple DOES have a rational relation to that interest. Just as being closely related DOES have a rational relation to that governmental interest.
These court cases declare marriage to be unrelated to procreation and is instead now to serve the governmental interest in the formation of stable homes. Being closely related or not has no rational relation to that new governmental interest in fostering the formation of stable homes. Closely related couples benefit from a stable home just as much as couples who are not closely related.
I don't really expect you to understand.

 

well you did quote what I said, so I felt it pretty safe to assume that you where referring to me...

 

I can't understand nonsensical rationalization.

Lets break this down:
Race has no rational relation to the governmental interest in improving the well being of children that only heterosexual couples produce.

The State of Virginia disagreed with you. The State of Virginia argued that it had a rational purpose in denying mixed race couples the right to marry- of course procreation and children wasn't even part of the case.

While the opposite genders of the couple DOES have a rational relation to that interest. What rational relation is that?

Just as being closely related DOES have a rational relation to that governmental interest. What rational relation is that?

Like I said- your argument is hypocritical and merely a pretense for discrimination against homosexuals.

 

I don't make things personal here, but I can see how one could take what I say more personally than they should.

 

And if you choose to take manmade interpretations of God's intent instead of looking into your own conscience and using your GOD GIVEN free will and ability to think. . .that is also up to you. . .and between you and God.

So. . .Why continuing to impose your idea of "sin" or "the word of God" when, ONLY GOD KNOWS!

 

Sadanie, do you believe that there is a heaven and a hell? and I ask you again, do you stand strong on the teachings of Jesus or do you feel that the books of Mathew, Mark, Luke and John have all been corrupted as well?
What if my God given conscience tells me something different from yours? Whose conscience is right? I must admit you have me very confused, you talk about being a Christian but in the next breath you disregard the very thing that Christianity is founded on, the Holy Bible. I'm not trying to be a wise guy, I'm honestly trying to figure this out.

 

Even so, it makes sense to leave the changing of hearts/minds to a Higher Power. Everyone cannot be reached/persuaded by what YOU yourself believe or have faith in; some people will always believe 'differently' than yourself (even many bearing the same labels, attending the same churches).

That many 'believers' are too 'pushy'... is an understatement, in this world.

 

This is such casuistic nonsense. Who really goes around saying I hate rape but I sure love those rapists? The morally and intellectually defective, that's who. I like how you name these people as "anti-homosexual" in the very same sentence as you say they're not attacking homosexuals, just homosexuality. Hate the sin, love the sinner - Give me a break.

 

I made myself clear before. I believe in Christ as a great prophet, and he is obviously the son of God as we ALL ARE. I believe in his MESSAGE, NOT in other's INTERPRETATION Of his message, including Paul who never met Christ. ALL the messages from both the old and the new testaments have been skewed by HUMAN INTERPRETATIONS themselves skewed by human agenda (including the greed for power, money, intolerance, lack of scientific knowledge, and lack of knowledge of the world and the universe in general, and the cultural mores men are attached to).

Yes. . .I feel that ALL the books have been "corrupted," some willfully, some just because of all the elements I just mentioned. It's pretty simple. . .EVEN IN THE SAME language, today, there are different "versions" or "interpretations" of the scriptures.
And I believe that, when a person of good will looks within him/her conscience (God given conscience) and uses his/her ability to think and free will (God given also), that person has AT LEAST as much chance to KNOW what God's intent, and Christ's intend was and what is "right" and what is "wrong."

And, NO, I do not believe in "heaven and hell." In fact, I believe we CREATE our own heaven and hell right in this life. And I believe that, all men/women are born with good and bad within them, and that the side that is "fed" throughout their life wins

A Christian does NOT NEED to be a sheep and swallow every words (man made words) that some "men" believe should be taken in spite of the totally illogical, totally ridiculous, totally contradictory message those "interpretations" of the words give us.

If God had wanted us to be sheep, and if he had not thought it was GOOD for us to use our intelligence and our conscience to move close to HIM/HER/IT and to understand increasingly more of what He/She/It means.

What I do know with a certitude that goes far beyond any "book" teaching is that God NEVER intended to split his creation, to raise one side against the other, to see human rise against each other and fight, and point the finger, and reject each other BECAUSE OF RELIGION.

I love Gandhi's saying: "GOD HAS NO RELIGION"

Some "Christians" will judge my faith as "non-Christian," and I really don't care! I feel that I am close to what Christianity. . is all about, in fact, I feel that I am closer to what GOD is all about, no matter what "flavor" of religion one chooses to adopt!

And, I am not saying that to trouble you, to disrespect your faith, or to convince anyone. We EACH have to find our path to God. . .if yours is through old books. . .that is a choice you make, and as long as you live in peace with your conscience and you don't hurt anyone with self-righteousness, intolerance, bigotry and arrogance, your road is as good as any. And I believe that, based on your comments, you are trying to live to the best of your faith, so I totally respect that.

However, I am NOT a sheep, and I do not feel the need to follow the flock!

 

That doesn't make sense. Getting remarried isn't as bad for society as homosexuality. And Jesus was against murder too. According to your logic, I should get as upset about remarriage as I do about murder, or else you won't take my concern for murder seriously. --

And where do you find that Jesus was against remarriage?