Can You Be Gay and a Christian ? ? ?

Why do you continue to ask questions I have already answered? Absolutely anyone can tell the difference between someone saying "I read passage ______ to mean _____" and "The people who wrote the bible knew a lot less about the world than we do now. That's why I think they got it wrong when it comes to homosexuality." It's not at all difficult to identify the distinction between saying that you believe the Bible is saying "X" and saying that the Bible is wrong about "X."

B.S. You intend it to be irritating. I've had plenty of experiencing dealing with your type of sophistry among pseudo-academics. Such parlor tricks are wasted on me, so I hope you're just using them for the audience.

I'm pro-choice and agreed with the Supreme Court striking down sodomy laws, so obviously I'm not aligned with "fundamentalist" beliefs out of some mindless allegiance to conservatism. But of course you know that. Either consciously or subconsciously you're just using that accusation as a means of discrediting my positions in your own mind. It's an easy way for you to dismiss them without actually arguing the points themselves.

No, you aren't. You're trying to again position yourself as some enlightened being who looks down on mere mortals and pretends to struggle at understanding their flawed rationalizations. This is all a way for you to assume a mantle of faux superiority without actually achieving it through works. It's how you garnered a reputation as a thinker without actually ever spending the time to postulate to any significant degree. Unfortunately those tactics do work on the masses, but like I said, I've dealt with hundreds if not thousands of people just like you who employed similar tricks. In any case, this thread isn't about you or me.

 

Hasbeen99 already gave you an example. Nowhere in the Bible is there any suggestion that all sins are equal, and there are plenty of examples where different sins are treated differently. Obviously prescribing that one offense results in death while another requires a lesser punishment means that the former sin was more egregious. What you said was simply wrong, but unfortunately it seems as if you want to belabor the point out of stubbornness.

What is it with people pretending that they can't understand things? You, like Vito, are undoubtedly intelligent enough to grasp the distinction. You're pretending as if you can't simply because you care more about the act of arguing than the issue being argued. Nowhere did I ever suggest that the only acceptable "Christian" way of looking at the Bible is purely literal interpretation. In fact, historically it's fairly rare for Christian leadership to deny the presence of allegory in the Bible, although there have been disputes about which parts are allegory and which parts are intended to be historical.

Saying that the creation account is allegory is not remotely the same thing as saying that the Bible's stated position on "_______" is outdated and wrong. You know that, so let's not waste any more of my time pretending that you don't. And for the record, the Bible does not say that the earth is "X" number of years old. Bishop James Ussher made that determination on the basis of obviously flawed methodology.

 

I see your point; but in the descriptions laid out in those passages, procedures were being laid out for governing a physical nation as a theocracy.

In spiritual terms, the penalty for ANY sin is death, is it not? (I'm thinking here especially of the passage at Romans 6:23, but there are others that give the same idea).

I certainly wouldn't argue that some transgressions don't cause more harm than others, & are therefore "worse" in that sense. But when it comes to being judged by the God of the bible, any single one condemns you to the same fate. The "unsaved" person whose worst fault was lying about his accomplishments isn't punished any less severely than the serial murderer. Death is death. Hell is hell.

 

Yet nowhere in the Bible is there anywhere that sins are ranked in accordance to their severity, are they?

I am indeed intelligent and certainly can grasp degrees. However, none of that is at issue here. Your point - as I took it - was that tries to interpret the Bible in any way other than its literal meaning, then they cannot be a Christian. Is that not what you are saying?

I am sure that you would agree that the worst punsihment that could be prescribed is death, yes? Do you agree with all of the specifc sins that require that punishment are the same?

I will have to look into the Ussher stuf though, as I was under the impression that the Bible mentioned the age of the earth. Admitiedly, I am far from a Bible expert though.

 

Sorry, Collin. You are very wrong on every point here. I'm genuinely curious about your views.

How people view religion and think about religion is something I find endlessly fascinating. As I stated, I think you and I probably share quite a bit in common on how we view some aspects of religion. How you arrive at your views is something I do have a genuine interest in.

If you think I'm trying some parlor tricks in this forum, you're sadly mistaken. I'm not aligning you with fundamentalist beliefs, but do feel that you do have some sympathies in that direction, not from a necessarily religious view, but from a more libertarian base.

 

Would it not be prudent to infer that a sin that precipitates a death sentence would be worse than one that precipitates the loss of a couple of head of cattle?

Yes, but only because of the value of the sacrifice of Christ. His life was so valuable and so pure that it fulfilled the OT law for everyone, and at the same time, His sacrifice paid every penalty for every law anyone from that point on ever broke, which created the age of grace. It's not so much that He equalled the severity or audacity of sins, but His sacrifice made the differences a moot point.

 

For the most part, that is true. But I believe there are some (namely the 10 commandments) which transcend Biblical Israel.

Indeed, but how is the Bible defining "death"? Is it talking about physical death? Spiritual death? Or both?

Agreed. The differences in audacity are a moot point if any rebellion against God is enough to separate you from Him for all eternity. Or to put it another way, if you're thrown into a lake of fire, does it really matter how tall the flames are?

 

You've already been given a passage in Exodus where sins are ranked by severity, so why are you asking questions you already have an answer for? You suggested that all sins are equal. That's obviously wrong, but unlike hasbeen99, you apparently can't admit it.

Considering that I explicitly said that wasn't what I was suggesting, and moreover, that it bore no resemblance whatsoever to anything I actually posted, I think it's pretty safe to say that I'm not saying what you claim I'm saying. Moreover, I'm sure you know that's not what I said, you're just embarrassed about having said something wrong and are lashing out.

Not necessarily.

It doesn't.

 

I swore I was gonna stay out of this, but NO, homosexuality is not a sin. Simply BEING is no sin. Acting on homosexual urges and engaging in homosexual acts IS (according to the Bible.)

But then again... so is remarrying after a divorce, premarital sex of heterosexual couples, having sex with a woman on her menses etc...

 

Actually that's incorrect, isn't it? I thought the Bible also explicitly said that you can commit sins without actually engaging in the act itself.