what the bible says about homosexuality¿

I don't want any cynical atheists in this thread, I just want to explore theories and all.

There's this passage in the Bible that says that gays won't recieve heaven. And of course, people have used this passage as a weapon to descriinate for centuries and centuries, etc yet in the apocalypse, there is another passage that goes something like

"as for the murderers, sorcerers, fornicators, idolators and all liars their lot shall be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone"

well the weird thing is that in the first passage it goes something like "and the murderers, sorcerers, fornicators idolators, liars and men that bed other men shall not receive the kingdom of heaven"

then in the apocalypse it mentions all except "gays". why do you think that is?

well if the first thing you do is exclude people (assuming they post in good faith) your debate loses value

secondly, if you don't get quotes exactly right with as much info as possible about their authorhip and translation the debate will probably just become a shouting match between entrenched prejudices

__________________
they arrived dramatically at the space gun in an art deco-style autogyro

Just shuddup.

It's true though. There's no way the Bible uses the word "gays".

There arent many places where a gay can fuck and not have it called fornication.

Bible provides no reason for why being homosexual is wrong, it just says "God hates that". Well not that I found anyway..... I might be wrong.
It goes against natural law that a lot of catholic teachings work on though.

you know what I mean, give me a break.

but 'you know what i mean' and other vagaries have been the cause of all the misunderstandings in the first place. there's a school of thought that has it that the sins of sodem were mistranslated.

__________________
they arrived dramatically at the space gun in an art deco-style autogyro

tell me more.

well maybe if i spelt it right

i'm not feeling up to it, but here's some links

http://dictionary.laborlawtalk.com/Sodom

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibg.htm

__________________
they arrived dramatically at the space gun in an art deco-style autogyro

wtf is wrong with you?

This. If the Bible was ever specific enough to use modern English (if God is omniscient, surely he could've written in language that would be easily understandable by all races, removing the proclivity for mistranslation), you couldn't misinterpret it. It's the fact that, so far, no "official" translation exists that causes a lot of these problems.

well first of all the Bible is a set of codes, metaphors to protect the truth from people who can't deal with it, whatever that means, but it's the truth.

Also, popes interfered with the bible and destroyed books of the bible and changed others so how do you expect to have an official translation??

are you an atheist¿? most people that don't believe in God are always like "well if God is so powerful, then why doesn't he do this or that?" well when we decided to "take a bite of the apple" aeons of time ago, this world was created and the deal was that we have free will. God interferes and helps us and protects us but ultimately we have free will and we do what we want and he allows it because that was the deal.

Where are you getting that from? Is it in the Bible? I always assumed the Bible was obtuse so that people could read whatever they wanted into it. That is pretty much the opposite of writing in such a way as to exclude people.

The pope is supposed to be God's representative or something. If they've interfered with the Bible, surely it would be in accordance with God's will.

This is pretty much chapter one of my forthcoming book "Why God Is A Douchebag". I'm not exactly an atheist, I consider the possibility of there being a god, but I don't believe the Bible because it's basically just a list of lame excuses for why God is being such a jerk. The whole free will thing is the best one, as it more or less discounts the possibility of having a reasonable discussion about whether God is a benign force or not.

Also, it wasn't really a "deal", was it? More of a "swindle".

my god are you serious??
ok, point one: I read that on many metaphysics book, and I believe it.

2: if the popes interfered with the bible is in accordance to god's will? what the fuck?? that is so ignorant. Popes are humans and they are mostly corrupt so they do everything excep god's will.

3: God is not being a jerk. The darkness in the world is not His responsability but ours and ours only and we are the ones that should be held accountable for it. Deal with it.

J.K. Nelson: "If you read it literally, in its English translation, without considering its context, one could say the Bible condemns homosexual activities. When we look at the Bible and try to draw moral rules for living, but we take it out of the context of the time when they were written, we do them a great injustice."

Why would God encode his message though? Explain what possible benefit there would be in making the Bible hard to understand. You say people are "not ready to hear it". I'm sorry, I just don't buy that. Even Silvine wants to be understood when he's preaching his bullshit.

You're not a Catholic then? The whole basis of the Christian religion is that God chooses people through whom to do His work. If you don't believe that the Pope does God's will, why do you trust the prophets who wrote the Bible in the first place? They were doing what they claimed God told them, but if the Pope is fallable so are they.

See my point here? Since you're not allowed to ask for proof from God, you're at the mercy of individuals. If you want to question the validity of those who claim that God worked through them, what basis do you use to test whether they're telling the truth or not?

God invents Adam and Eve, God gives them an idyllic paradise, God tempts them, Eve fails the first, one and only test, humanity is cast out of Eden and left to fend for itself for all eternity.

If God was a parent he'd be in court.

Nelson is saying we should only read it in the context in which it was written. But does that mean that the nature of sin changes with the changing of that context? Wouldn't that make God entirely fallable? I mean, say something was sinful a thousand years ago, but in a modern context it's not. Does a person who went to hell for that sin a thousand years ago get a reprieve?

first of all, I do not appreciate your ironic smart ass tone, so let's change that.


no, I'm no longer catholic. Yes God works through people, but there is a passage in the bible that says something like "through their work, you will know them". You know people through their work. If I see a Pope supporting Nazis then that is proof enough for me to know that he is not doing God's work. I don't know if that makes sense but that's how I see it. I don't believe for one second that the people who protected the pedophiles in church are doing God's work. More like Satan's work. The cloth means nothing.


God DIDN'T tempt them, the snake did. Get your facts straight woman!!!

Also, that's a metaphor.