Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » World Watch » Will same sex marriage really hurt anybody? (Page 5)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 8 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8   
Author Topic: Will same sex marriage really hurt anybody?
hobsen
Member
Member # 2923

 - posted      Profile for hobsen   Email hobsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Sorry, RickyB, but you are not a Christian. Many Christian sects say the whole of OT law was superseded by the coming of Christ. They certainly do not advocate the death penalty for homosexual acts; and they reject that any OT law is necessarily binding upon Christians, although of course Christian tradition has taken over much of it. It is fairly obvious that Christians in general do not follow all the OT laws followed by Orthodox Jews, and which ones to follow depends upon the tradition of the sect and not Jewish tradition. Many, notably Mormons, follow laws which were never included in the OT.

[ November 09, 2008, 06:49 PM: Message edited by: hobsen ]

Posts: 4387 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
RickyB
Member
Member # 1464

 - posted      Profile for RickyB   Email RickyB   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
This is true, but pretty much every major Christian denomination considers homosexuality anathema. Paulie was pretty clear, I think.
Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Star Pilot 111
Member
Member # 1972

 - posted      Profile for Star Pilot 111     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
There's a few places in the New Testament.
In the King James ves. try Romans 1:22-32.

Posts: 337 | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
hobsen
Member
Member # 2923

 - posted      Profile for hobsen   Email hobsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Opinion is divided, RickyB. As I have probably mentioned before, you can find Baptist, Episcopalian, Lutheran, Methodist and Presbyterian clergymen performing same sex weddings in California today - or at least last week. You could probably find Roman Catholic priests doing so also quietly. As for whole denominations, few have yet officially approved same sex weddings; but that is coming.

Certainly Paul probably condemned homosexual acts, following Jewish tradition; but he also said slaves owed loyalty to their masters, and that women should be subject to men. Those were his personal opinions, as a man of his times, except for conservative Christians who view those words as being dictated to him by God. Verbal inspiration of the Bible is held by some major Christian sects, but it is no longer the majority opinion. Judaism, BTW, appears to be more conservative than Christianity in that respect; I have seen Jews identify typical Christian statements as probably Unitarian, when they were in fact middle-of-the-road for any mainline denomination. Or maybe Jews themselves are liberal, and do not realize many Christians are much the same.

And what also complicates the matter, RickyB, is that most Christians do not believe that a clergyman marries a couple. Rather they believe the couple marry one another, and the function of the clergyman is to give a blessing and to record the ceremony. But that makes it unclear that a denomination has the power to tell a clergyman what to do in the matter; essentially, any clergyman can bless anything he wants. Christian churches have problems saying a clergyman is necessary for a marriage, as that would make many of the ancestors of Jesus illegitimate. Also Roman Catholics, for example, have to explain how members of their denomination can marry one another validly when no priest is available. That frequently happens in South America, for example.

[ November 09, 2008, 09:24 PM: Message edited by: hobsen ]

Posts: 4387 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by RickyB:
"most are based on translations of the Bible made by people who wanted to insert an anti-gay bias. There is no solid word against it in the New Testament, and the only strong reference in the Old is from a morality code that's included for historical purposes, not because it's something that Christians are expected to follow. (Specifically because the New Covenant replaces it)"

Um, no. Sorry, coulda been nice, but no. Only by willfully ignoring stuff can you make christianity or judaism accepting of (active) homosexuality. You can reason it all you like, but the OT edict is clear, immutable, and carries the death penalty.

More esoteric arguments aside, the OT edict was part of the cultural law that Jesus declared untenable (which also included heaps of other dictates that Christians blithely ignore as well)
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Star Pilot 111:
There's a few places in the New Testament.
In the King James ves. try Romans 1:22-32.

Where Paul speaks of heterosexual people who acted against their natures to perform pagan temple prostitution rites.

It's not unlikely that his words were strongly colored by cultural dislike for homosexuality and he was using it for shock value, but such temple prostitution is something that Christ did explicitly speak out against, in part because it featured in such rites, and in part because it force people to participate in abusive acts.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by hobsen:
And what also complicates the matter, RickyB, is that most Christians do not believe that a clergyman marries a couple. Rather they believe the couple marry one another, and the function of the clergyman is to give a blessing and to record the ceremony. But that makes it unclear that a denomination has the power to tell a clergyman what to do in the matter; essentially, any clergyman can bless anything he wants. Christian churches have problems saying a clergyman is necessary for a marriage, as that would make many of the ancestors of Jesus illegitimate. Also Roman Catholics, for example, have to explain how members of their denomination can marry one another validly when no priest is available. That frequently happens in South America, for example.

Here in PA, Quaker marriage licenses are respected by the state, even. No clergy required at all. Just a minimum of two witnesses to sign saying the couple is married.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by cherrypoptart:
Not sure how much it hurts to never exist as when I didn't exist I can't recall much in the way of pain, but assuming that there are a lot of people at various points on the Kinsey scale, and some of them that aren't all the way on the heterosexual side might in a more gay friendly cultural environment choose a life long gay marriage instead of the straight one they would in a different cultural environment have chosen, and that many of these people now won't have the children they otherwise would have had, we have finally found the people it hurts. Who? The grandparents who never become.

Except that even as heterosexual couple that wants to remain childfree can do so, just as a homosexual couple could adopt children.

(Except in Arkansas now, where they've taken oppression one step further)

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by duckslayer:

I'm sure that you know more about Mr. Obama's possition than I might. I only go off of his answer to a direct question at the last debate, "are you for gay marriage"? Obama simply replied "no" which surprised me. I guess you can chalk it up to a politician saying what he thinks is necessary to get elected.

Or one who can see the difference between his personal beliefs (which do not support it) and the need for the government to accommodate those beliefs which are not in line with his own. (This position is made pretty clear in his 2006 Call to Renewal speech as well)
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ron Lambert:

The origin of marriage is given in Genesis 2:21-24: "And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. Then the rib which the Lord God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man. And Adam said: 'This is now bone of my bones And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man.' Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh." (NKJV)

This is the origin of all marriage traditions in all human cultures.

This was the first sex ed class, actually. "Become of one flesh" a sexual euphemism, not one that speaks directly of marriage.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Star Pilot 111
Member
Member # 1972

 - posted      Profile for Star Pilot 111     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pyrtolin quote
Where Paul speaks of heterosexual people who acted against their natures to perform pagan temple prostitution rites.
______________________________________________

Did you read chapter 27?

" And likewise also the men, leaving
the natural use of the woman,
burned in their lust one toward another;
men with men working that which is unseemly..."

It seems to me to be, speaking of Homosexuality.
_______________________________________________

Pyrtolin quote
It's not unlikely that his words were strongly colored by cultural dislike for homosexuality
_______________________________________________

The culture in those days was anything goes. He was talking against cultural norms. Paul did not teach so he wouldn’t ruffle the feathers of the cultural norm. Paul was one of the last, with the true authority, to teach the true gospel, before the government instituted the Nicene Creed. That’s when all the goofy stuff came in. The Trinity (the 3 in one God) unknowing and incomprehensible, and many other things the government used to have control of the people.

Posts: 337 | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Star Pilot 111
Member
Member # 1972

 - posted      Profile for Star Pilot 111     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What if Catholics wanted to call themselves Jews but still practice only Catholicism? Who would that hurt? [Big Grin]
Posts: 337 | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
hobsen
Member
Member # 2923

 - posted      Profile for hobsen   Email hobsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Pyrtolin quote
It's not unlikely that his words were strongly colored by cultural dislike for homosexuality

Pyrtolin probably meant that Paul's words were colored by his own dislike for homosexuality derived from his strict Jewish upbringing. His converts did not share his prejudices, which is why they were behaving in ways he did not like.
Posts: 4387 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Star Pilot 111:
Pyrtolin quote
Where Paul speaks of heterosexual people who acted against their natures to perform pagan temple prostitution rites.
______________________________________________

Did you read chapter 27?

" And likewise also the men, leaving
the natural use of the woman,
burned in their lust one toward another;
men with men working that which is unseemly..."

It seems to me to be, speaking of Homosexuality.

He does in fact speak of homosexual actions, but in the specific context to people who reverted from Christianity to pagan fertility rites, which included homosexual prostitution as part of fertility rites.

quote:

Pyrtolin quote
It's not unlikely that his words were strongly colored by cultural dislike for homosexuality
_______________________________________________

The culture in those days was anything goes. He was talking against cultural norms. Paul did not teach so he wouldn’t ruffle the feathers of the cultural norm. Paul was one of the last, with the true authority, to teach the true gospel, before the government instituted the Nicene Creed. That’s when all the goofy stuff came in. The Trinity (the 3 in one God) unknowing and incomprehensible, and many other things the government used to have control of the people.

Paul preached from the cultural perspective he was raised in. Homosexuality he believed to be bad, and he used it for shock value because of that. You can see similar cultural affects in the ways he casts women as inferior to men as well.

You have to look through that cultural taint to see the more fundamental meanings- to not give up on the absolution that God offers, to not act against ones own nature, and that letting the guilt from deeds that harm yourself or others linger drives people to further destructive behavior and even rationalization of it to believe that it's the right thing to do.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by hobsen:
quote:
Pyrtolin quote
It's not unlikely that his words were strongly colored by cultural dislike for homosexuality

Pyrtolin probably meant that Paul's words were colored by his own dislike for homosexuality derived from his strict Jewish upbringing. His converts did not share his prejudices, which is why they were behaving in ways he did not like.
Not converts in general, but specifically people who slid back into pagan worship practices (he also mentions creating idols and animal worship in the same passage)
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
hobsen
Member
Member # 2923

 - posted      Profile for hobsen   Email hobsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
OK, that makes sense. I believe some passages in Paul's letters do condemn backsliders rather than persons having no connection with Christianity. Most such passages perhaps, as there would have been little purpose in condemning people who had never heard of him. Of course plenty of Biblical passages also express general horror at the abominable practices of foreigners, but there is little evidence that such foreigners either knew or cared.
Posts: 4387 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ron Lambert
Member
Member # 682

 - posted      Profile for Ron Lambert   Email Ron Lambert   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Paul's writings are a red herring in this debate over same-sex marriage. Paul unmistakably denounces homosexual behavior as sin, and he is not the only Bible writer to do so. Moses condemned it, and Jesus Himself, in dictating His book of Revelation to John, said: "For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie. I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches." (Revelation 22:15, 16) Note that the term "dogs" in the above was a euphemistic reference to a homosexual, or male prostitute, common in religious practices in pagan temples.

But this is all still beside the point. The issue is not whether homosexual behavior is sinful behavior. It is not the worst sin; it surely is not the unpardonable sin (only blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is unpardonable, because if you denounce the work of the Holy Spirit as the work of Satan, then God has no other means to reach you and give you the ability to be convicted, repent, and be converted). And obviously adultery and liberal divorce laws do far more direct harm to the institution of marriage.

The real problem with legalizing gay marriages is that it puts human authority in direct conflict with the authority of the Creator, who instituted marriage in Eden as being between one man and one woman. Making an official proclamation of the highest human authority (national government) that contradicts the authority of the Creator on what constitutes marriage, is an entirely different matter. It is open, official rebellion against God.

This God cannot ignore. He must respond by withdrawing some of His protection, allowing disasters of all kinds to increase greatly.

The complaints of same-sex couples, that they are denied visitation rights in hospital, discriminated against in insurance matters, etc., can be remedied simply by allowing these rights to members of a "partnership" or common-law union. Those who insist on having same-sex unions defined as marriage are trying to compel everyone to APPROVE of their lifestyle. This goes beyond mere toleration, and seeks to impose views contrary to the Bible on those who believe in the Bible. It is tyrannical interference in freedom of religion.

But the most serious thing is that if national laws are enacted defining marriage to include same-sex couples, then that will be the beginning of the end. That will be the first blow, that sets all of end-time events predicted in Bible prophecy into motion.

The issue brought to view by Proposition 8 in California, is that if any state succeeds in legalizing same sex unions as constituting "marriage," that will impose a burden on all the other states, because the principle of reciprocity requires all states to recognize marriages deemed legal in any state. So if a same-sex couple are declared to be "married" in Massachusetts or California, then if those individuals move to Michigan, they must still be regarded legally as "married."

What this will do is impose a burden on the states that will require a final say to be rendered at the federal level. If this highest human authority in the land comes out in favor of declaring same-sex unions to be "marriages," then this will constitute a direct, official defiance of the authority of the Creator, and greatly multipled disasters of every kind will for a certainty follow, as God responds by withdrawing some of His protection--that for example so far has prevented large meteorites from striking inhabited areas on earth, and has prevented the super-volcano under Yellowstone National Park from erupting. Among other things.

I am not kidding. If same-sex unions are declared to constitute "marriages" by the highest human authority, then millions will die. This is an absolute certainty. God is the Source of all life. "In Him we live and move, and have our being." (Acts 17:28) To openly, officially rebel against the Source of all life, Who maintains our very existence, must have extremely dire consequences on a scale unprecedented in modern times.

[ November 11, 2008, 02:24 PM: Message edited by: Ron Lambert ]

Posts: 2645 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 6161

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by hobsen:
quote:
Pyrtolin quote
It's not unlikely that his words were strongly colored by cultural dislike for homosexuality

Pyrtolin probably meant that Paul's words were colored by his own dislike for homosexuality derived from his strict Jewish upbringing. His converts did not share his prejudices, which is why they were behaving in ways he did not like.
Also heavily influenced by the Stoics. The concentration on the spiritual and the denial of the physical. Would have preferred nobody had sex at all if that were practical. We got pretty messed up as a culture when we started to dis-integrate the physical and the spiritual.
Posts: 2635 | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I am not kidding. If same-sex unions are declared to constitute "marriages" by the highest human authority, then millions will die. This is an absolute certainty.
Oh, Ron, you're darling. *pats head*
Run along and play with your angels, now, dear.

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Funean
Member
Member # 2345

 - posted      Profile for Funean   Email Funean   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Wow. I think that might be the very first time I've seen an explicit argument here that the world will actually end if I can get married. Usually people just hint around about it, the slackers.
Posts: 5277 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Wow Ron, your god is a prick. BTW, when did you become a parody of yourself?
Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Haggis
Member
Member # 2114

 - posted      Profile for Haggis   Email Haggis   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I am not kidding. If same-sex unions are declared to constitute "marriages" by the highest human authority, then millions will die. This is an absolute certainty
So where are the dead millions in the Netherlands, Belgium, Canada, Spain, South Africa, and Norway? They all have legalized gay marriages. What is God waiting for?

By the way, Ron. It is an absolute certainty that millions will die. In fact, I predict that over the next hundred years, more than seven billion people will die.

Posts: 1771 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
So where are the dead millions in the Netherlands, Belgium, Canada, Spain, South Africa, and Norway?
It is a known fact, Haggis, that God only cares about the citizens of America. He also has a soft spot for the soil of Israel, but He doesn't particular care about any of the people living there.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Haggis
Member
Member # 2114

 - posted      Profile for Haggis   Email Haggis   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Oh. Silly me. What was I thinking?
Posts: 1771 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
munga
Member
Member # 6006

 - posted      Profile for munga   Email munga   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
My favorite thing about you, RL, is that you are just one person living in a secular community. You can spout all the opinion that you wish, and I will defend your right to do it. But I expect the courts to recognize every person's right to equal protection under the laws and make all civil contracts available to every American without reference to race, gender or religion.

[ November 12, 2008, 12:04 AM: Message edited by: munga ]

Posts: 5515 | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
jimskater
Member
Member # 181

 - posted      Profile for jimskater   Email jimskater   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ron Lambert:

I am not kidding. If same-sex unions are declared to constitute "marriages" by the highest human authority, then millions will die. This is an absolute certainty. God is the Source of all life. "In Him we live and move, and have our being." (Acts 17:28) To openly, officially rebel against the Source of all life, Who maintains our very existence, must have extremely dire consequences on a scale unprecedented in modern times.

And when the dust settles, the survivors will only be able to post at Ron's new site: http://ornery-er.org
Posts: 805 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ron Lambert:

The real problem with legalizing gay marriages is that it puts human authority in direct conflict with the authority of the Creator, who instituted marriage in Eden as being between one man and one woman. Making an official proclamation of the highest human authority (national government) that contradicts the authority of the Creator on what constitutes marriage, is an entirely different matter. It is open, official rebellion against God.

Except, of course, all those one man, many women marriages that were perfectly fine in the Old Testament.

We should also ignore Jesus when he said "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's", "Speak not of the speck in your brother's eye till you have removed the log from your own", and "My kingdom is not in this world, but the next" never mind his ongoing struggle to fully separate spiritual and secular authorities.

Your dire predictions are completely inconsistent with the New Covenant, which rendered obsolete the laws of Moses, describing it as counterproductive and unobtainable.

Jesus built his ministry on reaching out to sinners, to outcasts, and to the downtrodden. On breaking the power of those who used religious dogma to control people instead of liberating and lifting them up. He taught that sin lay not in esoteric and unfathomable laws, but in actions that harm yourself or those around you, and that even if you could not forgive yourself for your misdeeds, you could find freedom from the burden of guilt in divine absolution.

He said that of all the commandments, "Love thy neighbor as they self" was the most important to hold to, and spoke out against child molestation and temple prostitution (the words for which were later mistranslated to refer to homosexuality) because of the inherent harm in such practices.

It wasn't till later that such notables as St. Augustine polluted his message with their own personal demons, declared people to be fundamentally evil and dependent on the church for any happiness or hope of salvation; changed it from an uplifting message back into a tool of social oppression and control. While they did ensure centuries of prominence and power for the church, it at the price of corrupting it message so completely that it still often damages people as much as it helps them.

Your words are strongly belied by the ministry of Jesus, and even by Old Testament compact that God made with man after the flood to never again repeat the mistake of using natural disasters as punishment for sins.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
hobsen
Member
Member # 2923

 - posted      Profile for hobsen   Email hobsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pyrtolin, you misunderstand I think. A man with several wives had contracted several marriages - each marriage was still between one man and one woman. He and his wives had not had one marriage ceremony to marry the whole group at once. For that reason he could divorce one of his wives without divorcing all of them.
Posts: 4387 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
hobsen
Member
Member # 2923

 - posted      Profile for hobsen   Email hobsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ron Lambert said,
quote:
But the most serious thing is that if national laws are enacted defining marriage to include same-sex couples, then that will be the beginning of the end. That will be the first blow, that sets all of end-time events predicted in Bible prophecy into motion.
This assertion creates severe problems relating to human free agency as opposed to prophecy. If the events predicted in Bible prophecy, and the enactment of national laws, have been engraved in stone and completely known from the beginning, does it make sense to suggest they can be averted? What is more realistic is that you have a personal opinion that such a happening would be a sign of the end, and many others like you have been wrong about such omens for the last two thousand years. God does not follow your orders, nor necessarily agree with your opinions, nor necessarily take offense when you do.
Posts: 4387 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ron Lambert
Member
Member # 682

 - posted      Profile for Ron Lambert   Email Ron Lambert   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hobsen, what right do any of us have to exist apart from God? It is in great mercy that God has not wiped out our entire race, which is what humanity deserves (and was carried out against the new Head of our race on Calvary).

Pyrtolin, you make a number of assertions based on pop religion, but not on a sound, consistent exegetical and contextual interpretation of Scripture. The Ten Commandments were not done away at the Cross; the Cross was necessary because the Ten Commandments cannot be done away with.

I quoted Jesus Himself where He said that in the end, when the wicked are finally destroyed, among them will be "dogs," i.e. homosexuals and male prostitutes. But I also said that the main issue is not whether homosexual behavior is sin, the real issue is official defiance of the authority of the Creator over the definition of what consitutes "marriage."

In terms of responsibility before God, Western Civilization is the leader of the world, and the USA is the leader of Western Civilization. The USA will bring wholesale destruction to the world if it officially opposes the authority of God.

It does not matter if you think this is right, or whether you think God has a right to do this. God determines what righteousness is, not you. Also God is the Source of all life, and He continually upholds our very existence from breath to breath. For us to openly defy His authority by an official act, is reckless in the extreme.

Ridicule me if you will, like Tom does; but I have told you the truth. You will never be able to claim that I failed to warn you, when the disaster does come.

[ November 12, 2008, 04:28 PM: Message edited by: Ron Lambert ]

Posts: 2645 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Haggis
Member
Member # 2114

 - posted      Profile for Haggis   Email Haggis   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Tom wrote:
quote:
It is a known fact, Haggis, that God only cares about the citizens of America.
Ron wrote:
quote:
In terms of responsibility before God, Western Civilization is the leader of the world, and the USA is the leader of Western Civilization. The USA will bring wholesale destruction to the world if it officially opposes the authority of God.

In terms of prophecies, Tom's ahead 1 to 0. To be fair, it may take some time for Ron's to come to fruition. If Obama turns out to be the American Hitler, or if gay marriage turns out to cause an increase in natural disasters, Ron could have a potential score of two. If Ron's prophecies do not pan out, his score would be -2.

I'll be keeping track.

Posts: 1771 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Pyrtolin, you make a number of assertions based on pop religion, but not on a sound, consistent exegetical and contextual interpretation of Scripture.
But Ron, how do you know that your beliefs are based on "sound, consistent exegetical and contextual interpretation of Scripture?" How do you know that you are not in error?

I doubt that you can rely on human reasoning, since human reasoning can (and has) erred repeatedly in the past. Nor can you rely on your own feelings, since humans have felt many things that have turnd out to be wrong.

So how can you be so sure of yourself?

Posts: 8681 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
To be fair, I also predicted that the Iraq War would still be going on now, that it would cost billions more than projected, and that Obama would win -- all things that Ron said God would not permit. [Smile]
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Haggis
Member
Member # 2114

 - posted      Profile for Haggis   Email Haggis   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Link 'em and I'll count them. [Smile]
Posts: 1771 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Funean
Member
Member # 2345

 - posted      Profile for Funean   Email Funean   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Are you trying to set up a cult, Tom? With Haggis as First Smithers? [Wink]

That actually might be really amusing. Quick, start enumerating your unreasonable and capricious demands!

Posts: 5277 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Aris Katsaris
Member
Member # 888

 - posted      Profile for Aris Katsaris   Email Aris Katsaris   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ron Lambert:
In terms of responsibility before God, Western Civilization is the leader of the world, and the USA is the leader of Western Civilization.

Interesting. Is that merely your personal estimation about how God thinks, or another of your "This is absolutely certain fact". Because, strangely enough, I've never seen anything in the bible that proclaims USA the leader of Western civilization, or Western Civilization the leader of the world. I want to know if God considers GDP, military prowess, or population as the most significant criterion to determine "leadership".

Also, in terms of responsibility before God, are Japan and Eastern Europe included in "Western Civilization"? I want to know if God follows Huntington's scheme of categorizing civilisations.

quote:
Also God is the Source of all life, and He continually upholds our very existence from breath to breath.
Yeah, that's why it's silly to worry about comets and such, like you did. Dude, if he can blink us out with a thought, what's the point of talking about God's protection from stray comets? If God's displeased, he can presumably rewrite the history of the universe to wink us out of existence.

quote:
You will never be able to claim that I failed to warn you, when the disaster does come. [/QB]
And you will never be able to claim that I failed to mock you for turning yourself into a false prophet.

These prophecies you make are meaningless to me. But if God created me, then my obligation is to use the moral judgement he provided me with to the best of my abilities. And my moral judgment tells me that same-sex marriage is a good thing for states to recognize, if they recognize hetero marriage.

And since I'm not gay and I don't have a personal stake on the issue, I'd argue that my moral judgment is less impaired than yours in this matter.

Because you seem to be motivated by the fear of God's retribution, and I'm only motivated by what I perceive right and just and good and fair.

Posts: 3318 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ron Lambert:

Pyrtolin, you make a number of assertions based on pop religion, but not on a sound, consistent exegetical and contextual interpretation of Scripture. The Ten Commandments were not done away at the Cross; the Cross was necessary because the Ten Commandments cannot be done away with.

Everything relevant of the Ten Commandments themselves was contained within Jesus's message. I was not speaking of them but the huge body of cultural law that the ancient Hebrew people followed, which included the only admonitions against homosexuality in the Bible that are not extremely debatable.

quote:

I quoted Jesus Himself where He said that in the end, when the wicked are finally destroyed, among them will be "dogs," i.e. homosexuals and male prostitutes.

You quoted Revelations, not Jesus. A book that is, at best political satire about Nero written in a Christian context, and only included because it helps assert control over people. It is nearly completely inconsistent with the gospels and Jesus's ministry.

quote:

But I also said that the main issue is not whether homosexual behavior is sin, the real issue is official defiance of the authority of the Creator over the definition of what consitutes "marriage."

No one is asking you to defy your beliefs and enter a marriage that is not compatible with them. You are full well entitled to believe what you will so long as you do not force those who hod different beliefs to comply with yours. That is a fundamental law of the land.

quote:

In terms of responsibility before God, Western Civilization is the leader of the world, and the USA is the leader of Western Civilization. The USA will bring wholesale destruction to the world if it officially opposes the authority of God.

And as such should lead the way in reminding the world that moral actions only matter when people come to them freely. Using the force of law to force people to tow a particular moral code breeds resentment of that code rather than full hearted acceptance.

Using the force of secular law to enforce spiritual beliefs diminishes those beliefs; degrades them into caricatures of their true value. Especially in the Christian context where it's philosophy is founded in an attempt to divorce itself from just such an abuse of power.

quote:

It does not matter if you think this is right, or whether you think God has a right to do this. God determines what righteousness is, not you. Also God is the Source of all life, and He continually upholds our very existence from breath to breath. For us to openly defy His authority by an official act, is reckless in the extreme.

Then don't defy divine authority, if that's what you believe it to be. Do as Christ asked and lead by example, not by oppression, and wage your war on spiritual grounds, not secular ones.

God is life, life is God. We are part of that divine image and cannot help but carry out God's will (for as much as such a human conception as will can be applied to a divine abstract), as it is realized through our agency. To say that anything we do is anything but the will of God is hubris of the highest degree.

Whether your actions are in compliance with the old Mosaic Code, laws written to preserve a nomadic people in the face of competing, appealing beliefs or follow in the spirit of Jesus teachings to understand the spirit of the law and adapt it to fit the society in which it applies, your actions reflect the will of God.

Divine "punishment" comes when in the form of guilt or misery when you choose to act in a manner that harms yourself or others. While that id part of life, and thus God, it is also something that we have the freedom- the power- by nature to avoid on an individual basis.

Being more accepting and accommodating of all beliefs and natures of people, as Christ showed us to be, will not bring down any disasters, external or internal. But creating misery by casting out those who believe differently from you will darken you in the memories of those you have harmed; a personal, spiritual disaster for the one who caused the harm. That is the agency through which God's "punishment" enters the world.

quote:

Ridicule me if you will, like Tom does; but I have told you the truth. You will never be able to claim that I failed to warn you, when the disaster does come.

I will debate you, to remind you that even within one faith there is sufficient disagreement about the proper meaning that secular government has no business interfering, never mind codifying on particular side over all others, but I'll not stoop to personal attacks. I have faith enough in my own beliefs that I do not need to tear others down to cover any weaknesses.

[ November 13, 2008, 12:21 AM: Message edited by: Pyrtolin ]

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by hobsen:
Pyrtolin, you misunderstand I think. A man with several wives had contracted several marriages - each marriage was still between one man and one woman. He and his wives had not had one marriage ceremony to marry the whole group at once. For that reason he could divorce one of his wives without divorcing all of them.

That is certainly one way to chip the corners off of a square peg. I could also note here that same sex marriage was acceptable in the Roman Empire in particular until being 342, shortly before it was officially considered to have gone into decline.

(I'd certainly not claim there was an direct link aside from the more general principle that oppressive social legislation like that is generally only used when those in charge feel like they need to impose stronger control over those that they rule.)

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ron Lambert
Member
Member # 682

 - posted      Profile for Ron Lambert   Email Ron Lambert   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Tom, I never said God would not allow Obama to win. After all, He allowed Hitler to win election in pre-war Germany. If God would not allow an Obama victory, then why would I have warned against it? There are many choices God leaves it to us to make--but we must answer for them in the consequences that result.

Same for same-sex "marriage." God will not prevent us from exercising our freedom of choice. But there must be consequences of directly opposing human authority against the authority of the Creator.

Pyrtolin, I did quote Jesus. John was quoting Him directly in the passage I quoted from Revelation where Jesus was speaking (Revelation 22:15, 16).

As for the specious claims of unfaithful scholars who deride the book of Revelation, I believe that Revelation 1:1, 2 overrules them all:

quote:
The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John: Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.

Posts: 2645 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
But there must be consequences of directly opposing human authority against the authority of the Creator.
Like...?
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 8 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1