Sunday Morning Service
01 AUG 2010

Links of Interest

What the Bible Says - And Doesn't Say - About Homosexuality

Is there any necessary correlation between one’s disbelief in God and one’s place on the political spectrum? - Overview Review - Download the Audio Discussion

Building A Human Body

Things on T|A You Might Have Missed from the last few weeks

Oral History

Views: 38

Comment by Keith Johnston on August 1, 2010 at 11:20am
I have no idea why anybody would waste so much of their life studying biblical texts in order to find a way to interpret it to suit their own personal agenda. No matter what points are made the evangelical Christians will not listen since they are programmed not to. They actually cant do it. It has now been proven that they are in a strange psychological mindset that prevents them from doing so.
Its such a shame that Rev. Mel White appears to be suffering from something similar. Anybody with a normal capacity for rational thinking, when conducting such intensive study of the bible, would soon conclude it is a hate filled, divisive document. It's purpose is to create division, and to separate people into elites and those to be persecuted.

Its tragic that such an intelligent mind can be so badly infected with a meme that rational thought becomes impossible.
Comment by Keith Johnston on August 1, 2010 at 11:20am
I was discussing What the Bible Says - And Doesn't Say - About Homosexuality
Comment by Galen on August 1, 2010 at 12:42pm
Rev. White seems to have missed a very important (and, oddly, little-known) point. The original greek word that was translated to mean "homosexual" actually meant "temple prostitute." The Old Testament is the only document in history where that word has EVER been translated as "homosexual." In every other use of the word in ancient documents, it doesn't mean that at all. The bible, as it was originally written, says not one word about homosexuality.
Comment by Edward Kennedy on August 1, 2010 at 1:52pm
True or not, saying that "in its original written form" and "'re taking it out of context" are two of the most common arguments Christians make to get around the glaring problems in the bible. Whether or not the actual word "homosexuality" was used in the "original version", Christians are clearly opposed to homosexuals now, and because of their teachings. I am a married heterosexual, but I know that homosexuality is natural biological state of being, and necessary at that. Excluding myself, us "heteros" are breeding like frenzied rabbits (although I believe that those that adhere to religion are among those that reproduce the most as they still take literal the passage to "multiply". I have personally known Christians that have had children not because they wanted to, but because they "thought they were supposed to - according to the bible"). Homosexuality may pace a natural brake on the out-of-control population that others are not concerned enough about.
Anyway, here's what the bible says: 1 Corinthians 6:9 (New American Standard Bible (©1995))
"Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals,..." and again in 1 Timothy 1:10: (English Revised Version)
"...for fornicators, for abusers of themselves with men, for menstealers, for liars, for false swearers, and if there be any other thing contrary to the sound doctrine;..." and here's another pretty unambiguous one, that doesn't even need to mention the word - it is clearly implied: Leviticus 18:22 'You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."
Comment by luvtheheaven on August 1, 2010 at 8:42pm
I thought the "What the Bible Says - And Doesn't Say - About Homosexuality" article was a great read and one of the least confrontational ways to dispute homophobia among Christians, by showing them that they can still believe in the Bible but not be homophobic... idk... I'm surprised you all are hating on it so much.
Comment by Keith Johnston on August 1, 2010 at 9:06pm
I'm not hating on it LuvtheHeaven. I am observing the futility of studying something that is a bronze age work of fiction and treating it as a guide to modern living and morality and then attempting to reinterpret it in a more palatable manner for our current moral standards.
Comment by luvtheheaven on August 1, 2010 at 9:29pm
Yeah, well I do think it's ridiculous that there are people that know the bible doesn't apply to this day and age but still think the bible is holy and the infallible word of god, but there are a lot of people like that...
Comment by Gary Bergeron on August 1, 2010 at 11:28pm
Sexuality to me, is a brain function. An electrochemical construct. Genital make-up has nothing to do with it. To put it simply, hetero, homo, and bi-sexuality are all different ways of being human. Three unique reflections from the same image, so to speak.
As far as I'm concerned about the Holy Bible, as a modern man, I do not take advise from a book written thousands of years ago, by people who had no scientific intellect and had no knowledge of human psychology. I'd rather trust the guys in lab coats than the guys who thought it was okay to rip open the bellies of pregnant women and smash the heads of babies against rocks!
My 2 cents, for what it's worth. :)
Thanks for the Service Johnny, as always, another super-duper!
Have a good week everybody!
Comment by Galen on August 2, 2010 at 8:25am
@Edward - My point was that Christians (now or then) simply put whatever the hell they wanted into their Bible regardless of what it may or may not have actually said in the first place. Even if there was a god and even if the original work was created exactly as he wanted it, what we have today is NOT the original work and so could not be called the "word of god" even if such a being did exist!

@luvtheheaven - Not hating on the article either. I found it very refreshing and even forwarded it on to my wife, who is Catholic and thinks homosexuality is a sin (though she isn't hateful or discriminatory about this belief).
Comment by Chelsea Sherman on August 2, 2010 at 11:53am
I thought the article was really interesting. I agree that there's no need to condemn the reverend that wrote it just because he's a christian. He's obviously a very smart man and uses the bible more as a philosophical and spiritual guide and doesn't take it literally at all.
I want to have my grandma read this, but I'm sure it wouldn't change her mind about anything.


You need to be a member of Think Atheist to add comments!

Join Think Atheist

© 2020   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service