- Reaction score
Gotta disagree with you a little bit, Cav. I thought Josh's annecdote was a pretty good example of the mainstream attitude.
Sure, I would agree that it's a good example of mainstream attitudes. It seems though, that Q is using this story to try and back his claim that humankind has a instinctive repulsion to homosexuality.Gotta disagree with you a little bit, Cav. I thought Josh's annecdote was a pretty good example of the mainstream attitude.
Ok, now try and picture a really ugly woman, how would you feel watching her in a hard-core porno?Well, a lot of people are accepting of homosexuality in general, but sit a sample group down, wire'em up, and have them watch a gay male porno movie. I mean, I'm very liberal, and I don't give a damn what consenting adults do, but I'd find that a tad revolting at least.
And I agree on the 90% distaste being wrong...I'd say in the US where they are now saying there is 11% of the population engaging in homosexual (gay, lesbian, bisexual) activity...I'd say another 10-20% are openly accepting of this activity in their friends, co-workers, relatives, and associates.
I'd say the number of those that experience utter revulsion is under 60%...but the problem factor there is that many of those, as experienced by the headlines and personal experience are actually not out of the closet yet ie many homophobes have homosexual tendencies.
Back to your regular programming about which chapters and verses we choose to use to condemn others.
Nothing absurd about reality...heteros do not like homosexual behavior. That is the way things are. However no one has a problem until it is brought up by the ones coming out of the closet. Then it is in one's face.This is absurd, using a personal anecdote as some kind of revelation about the nature of human beings is ridiculous. So is an assertion that over 90% of people are instinctively revulsed by homosexuality.
What about those societies where homosexuality was commonly practiced? What happened to their instinctive revulsion?
No idea who Rock Hudson is lol, but anyway...
We? Humans? The bible is supposed to be the word of god... I am sure this awesome diety could determin if a person was gay or not.
Sure, I would agree that it's a good example of mainstream attitudes. It seems though, that Q is using this story to try and back his claim that humankind has a instinctive repulsion to homosexuality.
Though I guess that the people repulsed by homosexuality are in the majority, I object to his claims that figure is over 90%.
I also object to his claim that this repulsion is instinctive and not acquired.
i don't think anyone disagrees with this, as far as i can see jesus is here expressing a point of view that is very much supported by the prophets and by the rabbis who were his contemporaries. i should point out here that the rabbis i mean are more or less those who would have described themselves as "pharisees", but the propagandist paradigm of the "pharisee" as hypocrite belongs to a later period. our sages criticise the "sadducees" in much the same terms - but that's a different argument. either way, jesus, the prophets and the rabbis here are of one mind. however, it's also important to remember that these are not actually rituals of "cleanliness" per se. the words usually translated as "clean" or "unclean" certainly have nothing to do with hygiene. they are to do with spiritual fitness or unfitness to be used in particular ways, but this is a complex system and not easily understood. suffice it to say that a priest or levite who is "clean" can serve in the Temple, a "clean" person may engage in marital relations and communal dining and a "clean" food can be tithed or a "clean" animal sacrificed. "clean" may not be mixed with "unclean". in fact, the best way to understand it is as a system of, as it were, spiritual plumbing. your "pipes" are either "clean" (unblocked) or "unclean" (blocked). your spiritual "pipes" also receive input from and output into your actual "pipes", via eating, sex and various actions. the gateway point from one to another is via immersion in a ritual pool (rather like baptism) after a prescribed time. i hope this makes sense.BlaznFattyz said:it is not enough to follow ceremonial rituals of cleanliness if one is spiritually immoral and thus defiled internally. its not food that causes you to be defiled, but your actions that come from within your heart.
last time i checked, silas, you were not in charge of what gets discussed here on the forum. if you don't want to discuss this, don't discuss it. i am unlikely to miss your input. see you later, matey.Silas said:Religion aside. Is this really a topic we have to discuss?
this is a PoV often expressed by those who subordinate the Will of G!D to reason and/or science and, of course, as you correctly surmise, if that's the reason and nowadays you can eat your pork chops and oysters without getting food poisoning there's no reason to keep the commandment. obviously that's not something i agree with, because it is elevating something above the Law and that would be a negation of what we are about. so that is not an argument i can accept.Dondi said:I'm sure you have considered that many of the dietary laws commanded by G!D were hygienic in nature in the ancient Jewish culture, i.e. eating pork was just plain unhealthy. They didn't have refrigerators or preservatives that we have today, so I can see the value in G!D keeping His people healthy.
aha! but what you're doing there is jumping to conclusions, big-time styley. the first thing the jewish approach would do is say "and what precisely do we mean by that"? unfortunately, there is never enough detail in the Torah to tell us. for example, by far the worst type of sexual immorality in our terms is what used to be known as "temple prostitution" - and that doesn't really exist any more. in fact there's an extremely strong case for saying that the meaning of "sexual immorality" is so strictly defined that it is hard to consider any consensual activity as qualifying under this heading. moreover, if you are appealing to the noahide law, it is not interpreted by mr noahide-in-the-street, but through the lens and process of halakhah. you can't just make up your own interpretations according to what appeals to you. what is more, it is extremely hard to argue that you should spend any effort on giving homosexuals a hard time while there are still rapists and other sexual exploiters out there. you would have a hard time convincing me that what someone does with their partner in the privacy of their bedroom, which i neither see, approve, nor am involved in, is more important than something which affects me, like a rapist. if you're going to use a guide, you should use the right guide, not make it up yourself.Since sexual immorality is listed, then it stands to reason that the Noahide might just want to learn what exactly "sexual immorality" consitutes. Where else to go but to the OT and the Mosaic Law. Thus when coming to Leviticus 13:15, we have an understanding that homosexuality is an abomination to the Lord. It may not be a requirement for Noahides to obey the Law, but we can certainly use it as a guide.
For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off.
It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it?
Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it?
But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.
" - Deut. 30:11-14
in the nicest possible way, you have absolutely failed to appreciate the point i was making. the way we understand this section is that the Law is not something that sits off in some theoretical field somewhere - it is something we are commanded to interpret and understand; but this means *through the prism of tradition* which means via the halakhic process, *not* everyone deciding for themselves what something means. there must be a majority opinion, as it says in the Torah - see exodus 23:2.It is not with the outward observance that G!D wants, but the inward obedience.
ok, but we are concerned with understanding the unfolding will of G!D - but the fact remains that we consider this an issue between man and G!D not man and man - so it is not up to humans to start poking around in each others bedrooms without a by-your-leave.All the same, if you want to dabble in semantics and call one thing a sin and another thing a tresspass, it is still unpleasing to G!D.
they still have the lower souls - and they are still part of Creation and part of the Design. i stand by my objection.Yeah, but animals are not created in the image of G!D
we do not believe in a One Right Way. we believe there are many faces to Torah and that someone who has never even heard of Torah can still be a good person as long as they keep the noahide laws. i believe this still constitutes a major difference between us.what do "cultures" have to do with obeying G!D?
umph. everyone's got to have priorities. if you'd rather oppress people who are doing nothing that affects you than deal with things that you are actually able to improve then i think you are attempting to preempt the Divine. if G!D really hates gays (which i doubt) then G!D is perfectly able to punish them without your help. on the other hand, G!D is *definitely* relying on us all to save the planet, bring world peace, end hunger and so on. what sort of humans do nothing to help themselves whilst spending their time criticising others?Homosexuality, along with all the other things you listed, are but symptoms of a bigger problem: rebellion against G!D.
good point, although lot and his daughters are hardly righteous - he even offers his daughters to the mob in place of the angels and they themselves are the one who instigate his drunken incest.And that was my point about Sodom and Gomorrah. It wasn't homosexuality, per se, that was the ultimate cause for their destruction, it was the general rebellious unrighteousness, including homosexual behavior, toward God that triggered the judgement upon them. God couldn't find even 10 righteous people among them, save Lot and his family.