The Bible and Homosexuality

This has been some funny shit! My favorite absolutely was "Homophobia: Pseudo Christian" Bwahahahahaha
Guess we can do the good ol WWJD for this huh?
Matthew 19:11-12
(in the words of Jesus)
"But he said to them, "Allcannot accept this saying, but only those to whom it has been given: For there are eunuchs that are born thus from their mother's womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven"s sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it"
I think that mean squeal like a piggy don't it MyLee Jones?
I don't want to upset anybody. It doesn't do any good and homo-repressed christians always feel on the defense and do enough hurting as it is.

 

nope! my point about Constantine was (if not entirely) then slightly, facetious, but the wider point is; the bible has gone through several revisions over its life (of which perhaps the most notable was precided over by ol' constantine), what basis have we for the claim that the current version is the definitive word of god? or any version, for that matter.

 

My point was kinda picky. Actually, it was a later Roman emperor, Theodosius I, who shaped Christianity by imposing the Nicene creed. After the Council of Nicea rejected the teaching of Arius that Christ was created by the Father or was of a different substance from God, Constantine tried to patch things up with the Arians. Until that time, Constantine had not been baptized and continued to worship Apollo, but he accepted baptism by an Arian bishop. Theodosius I, however, (also not baptized at the time) settled the matter when he became emperor by reaffirming the Nicene creed and imposing it by law. any bishop who disagreed was removed from office. So right idea, wrong emperor.

 

Getting back to your main point, I think we have no basis for that claim. I think of the Bible is the words of inspired men trying to understand God, a metaphor for the incomprehensible Higher Power that is the ground of being, the summation of human idealism, and the meaning of life (at least mine). As such, it may not be "definitive", in that our comprehension is a work in progress, always subject to deeper levels of understanding. We could write off the Bhagavad Gita or the Nicomachean Ethics as ancient, and I wouldn't consider them definitive, but they're hardly irrelevant to the pursuit of virtuous living. Yale Professor Dale Martin explains: "More sophisticated Christian theologians insist that no physical embodiment of 'scripture' can be identified as 'scripture' itself, the 'word of God'. It is scripture, the word of God, when read in faith by the leading of the Holy Spirit." It's true "that scripture supplies us with what we need for salvation", but scripture is a "holy space we enter" rather than a "bookish source of knowledge". So "the text of the Bible does not 'say' anything. It must be interpreted."

 

The notion of "pseudo-sex" is intriguing. What does it mean? Since you don't say, we can only guess. The law considers it sex. People offering it in exchange for money could get themselves arrested. Pretends? Are you suggesting that homosexuals aren't really engaging in acts society identifies as sexual? Or is this metaphorical--a suggestion that it isn't "real" sex because...of what? Because it isn't procreative? Would a heterosexual couple using condoms be engaging in "real" sex? Or just pretending, like "children"? Was Clinton right when he said:" I did not have sex with that woman"? (just a little fellatio) But there's no sense speculating what you mean. It's up to you to spell it out.

 

love , to a christian , is not a theatrical relationship .
it's in defense of the psychedelic child mind that pseudo sexuality
shall not be presented as worthy and honorable . it isn't vital .

 

Thanks for clearing it up. "the psychedelic child mind"(Are you kidding? Or illustrating?)

 

i am remembering , and when i'm finished with that i
will rage as an angel . what's up with you these daisies ?

 

so love between to men/women can only ever be "theatrical"?

so love's worth is defined by its practical (or potentially practical) merits?

 

so let the little children be blessed . of such are
the kingdom of god .

do not abuse them with unreality lest they become angry .

some little kids wonder if they are homosexual . is it a reality
question ? i don't think it's a love question . could be a lonesome
question ... if so , do not reply .

 

sorry mate, i don't understand this response at all....

 

'scuse me that i didn't respond to your questions . i am writing of
my concerns for children . only a few words of the bible address
children - from the spirit of it i can put together a few more . i
notice the forthright publicity of homosexuality affects them . can
it be irresponsible mental abuse ? are casualities acceptable ... injury
through psychic confuktion ... anger

then , there's only a few words of the bible about homo sex . so the
taboo is likely beyond the biblical . could be from old time woman wisdom
of bio realism - which is woman tribal council wisdom .

 

Actually there are a NUMBER of words and instructions in the bible which address children...and "rules" that tell us how we should treat them. Now, this isn't in relationship to homosexuality...which I don't understand why you are determined to bring children into the equation with the "Bible and Homosexuality", which is the name of this thread.

In my experience, if a child is not around a biased, prejudiced homophobic person, they don't have any problem whatsoever with a gay person. Therefore, if they, too, felt this way, I doubt seriously they would have any problem with themselves...not that that has a thing to do with this topic.

Just ONE of the things that is stated in the bible about children is: Matt.18:6...(and Jesus said this)"But whose shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea."

Just because there are some extremists (or fundamentalists) that pick and choose verses out of context to justify beating the crap out of their children or to justify teaching them skewed beliefs does not mean they are right, or even following the letter or the spirit of the Word.

Furthurmore, being gay is something that is between the person and God...it is not blasphemy and it is certainly not anything for us as Christians to be judging. Christians need to do a LOT of learning about what is our business and what is someone else's private business. (jmo) Not judging is discussed a lot more in the bible than homosexuality.

 

you think that changing social attitudes towards and acceptance of homosexuality are so damaging to children as to be considered child abuse? i can't say i've ever noticed or thought this myself...

well, to a certain extent homophobia does predate christianity, but appears to be not as ingrained as it might appear, i'm sure the point has been repeatedly raised about greeks considering homosexuality to be a purer form of love than that between a man and a woman, not to mention contemporary tribes almost untouched by both western culture and abrahamic faiths where homosexuality is viewed in the same manner.

i would suggest that, far from being "old time woman wisdom" homophobia is more likely to be found in intensely patriarchal cultures, since, as it could be seen as transgressing traditional gender roles, or at least blurring the lines of sexuality, it constitutes a threat to strictly patriarchal hierarchies. Hierarchies which rely on maintaining the man/woman dichotomy in order to function, as well as placing great emphasis on the "traditional" family unit.

certainly the spread of bible-based religions didn't do too much to help dispel it, but they certainly aren't entirely to blame.

 

I don't know...I've seen plenty of people calling themselves christian in theatrical relationships. That "shall not be presented as worthy and honorable" sounds a little out there to me as well. On that matter between you and Aristotle, I'll go wit Aristotle...
Also as to this vague thing about "the children", first of all they creatures of sensuality primarily and second, by the numbers there is a hell of a lot more abuse and damage to children done by christians and straight people than gay people - you're villianizing blindly without statistic, source or merit.
I suppose when sense fails you'll just go to speaking in tounges like that big white lady here who wants to be a "most holy" indian? I mean to say you are not really speaking from the arms, legs or heart in my mind, more like parroting out of fear or something else?

 

ya , the children and i do speak in tongues . we
are together in this love of meaning exactly we intend .

the most injurious idea that has been popularized is
that some children are born homosexual . certainly
though , a few are born physically indeterminate .

.

some of you wield the word homophobia awkwardly .
do you need the hammer of Thor ?

 

But how do you know children aren't born more same sex oriented than not? When did we determine this? I am afraid we have no such comforting ease that life is so streamlined and simple in the matter of nature vs nurture and orientation.
I am pretty sure that high stakes bet on speculation causes more damamge than just plain truth? I mean to say I'd rather err on the side of being just as good and kind to a same sex oriented child as I could be because there is a lot at stake if one is wrong - so the child matters more than the idea or philosophy.
I must say, Biblically speaking by matter of weight, if we can give an animal a drink on the sabbath, then mercy is more important than law to god.
The term physically indeterminate seems off to me. Looks like physical determination was there it is endocrinal crisis that causes those people problems.
I don't want to hurt anyone's spiritual feelings but it seems to me that vital feelings have to take priority.

 

sexual orientation is defined by patterns of arousal, children don't have patterns of arousal, so they can't be either gay or straight.

although certain behavioral patterns can correlate with sexual orientation in later life.

by "physically indeterminate" do you mean that sexuality is entirely biological dictation? on that point we differ,

i use the word homophobia for convenience , since its way easier to write than "heteronormativity", which i'm forever mis-spelling, although both are valid in this instance, heteronormativity would probably be slightly more appropriate, but only because some might argue that the fear involved is NOT irrational. i (shockingly) would argue the opposite.

i prefer to use homophobia as a word, when the choice is presented me, mainly because, in my experience, freud's ideas of phobias and fetishes being to sides of the same coin is so very much on the money

 

I don't think you're likely to get far with rational thought in this dialogue. Tikoo has threatened to "rage like angel". When that happens, his meaning may become clearer.

Meanwhile, in hopes of providing a target for the rage that might bring the issues into better focus, let me offer my own thoughts as a Christian on the subject of homosexuality. I thought the young man on the video did a good job of explaining how he could be a Christian and gay at the same time. When I say I'm a Christian, I men that I accept the teachings and example of Jesus as my model for living. So that's the first place I turn in considering whether or not something is right or wrong. What did Jesus say about homosexuality? Apparently nothing. He had plenty to say about divorce, adultery, and lust, but nothing about homosexuality per se.

 

I'm still not sure I understand what Tikoo is trying to say. Science has yet to come up with a definitive explanation of homosexuality, but there seems to be a lot of research supporting a significant role for genetics, in which case it would be strange to keep that information from the public lest some child be warped by the truth. I agree it would be inappropriate to tell a kid they're "born that way" and nothing can be done about it. I don't think the science can support that. Most complex human behaviors involve an interaction between nature and nurture. But I also think it could be at least as damaging to tell a kid who says he's gay that he's made a sinful choice, or that it's his duty to date girls, marry and produce kids and grandchildren. How old a "child" are we talkin'? I know that kids are becoming sexually aware much earlier now, but I'd sure be uncomfortable getting into any talk along these lines with a child. When the kid is old enough for parents to have "the talk", that's probably a good time, but I don't think they should be telling him what he is--just giving him the information needed to understand and the guidance to make responsible decisions.