US Presidential Contenders

[Yitzi]

Its not my fault if you don't want to hear what the Bible says on the subject.

Actually, the Bible doesn't really say much about gay marriage per se.  It says that male homosexuality is sinful, and therefore gay marriage is recognizing sin...but that gets into the question of how secular American law should interact with God's law...

[Buster's Uncle]

Scientists: Earth Endangered by New Strain of Fact-Resistant Humans
The New Yorker
By Andy Borowitz



Credit PHOTOGRAPH BY NASA EO/REX/FEATURES VIA AP



MINNEAPOLIS (The Borowitz Report) – Scientists have discovered a powerful new strain of fact-resistant humans who are threatening the ability of Earth to sustain life, a sobering new study reports.

The research, conducted by the University of Minnesota, identifies a virulent strain of humans who are virtually immune to any form of verifiable knowledge, leaving scientists at a loss as to how to combat them.

“These humans appear to have all the faculties necessary to receive and process information,” Davis Logsdon, one of the scientists who contributed to the study, said. “And yet, somehow, they have developed defenses that, for all intents and purposes, have rendered those faculties totally inactive.”

More worryingly, Logsdon said, “As facts have multiplied, their defenses against those facts have only grown more powerful.”

While scientists have no clear understanding of the mechanisms that prevent the fact-resistant humans from absorbing data, they theorize that the strain may have developed the ability to intercept and discard information en route from the auditory nerve to the brain. “The normal functions of human consciousness have been completely nullified,” Logsdon said.

While reaffirming the gloomy assessments of the study, Logsdon held out hope that the threat of fact-resistant humans could be mitigated in the future. “Our research is very preliminary, but it’s possible that they will become more receptive to facts once they are in an environment without food, water, or oxygen,” he said.

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/scientists-earth-endangered-by-new-strain-of-fact-resistant-humans

Factual correction; like pneumonia being misnamed because it's the same old monia that been around as long as lungs have, this is not a new strain at all - which is rather embarrassing to still have here in the future.

[vonbach]

Actually, the Bible doesn't really say much about gay marriage per se.  It says that male homosexuality is sinful, and therefore gay marriage is recognizing sin...but that gets into the question of how secular American law should interact with God's law...

Leviticus 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."1
Leviticus 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them."

The Bible is pretty clear on it. Sorry felt I had to respond.

[Unorthodox]

The Bible is pretty clear on it. Sorry felt I had to respond.

I won't sully the thread by getting deeply into it here.  If you want a bible topic, I'm game. 

Fact is, those can be interpretted otherwise.  In fact, there is no evidence whether it was considered a moral sin or an unclean act (and there is a BIG difference) akin to eating pig, breeding a mule, or planting more than one kind of seed in your field.  The laws surrounding the verses are all unclean act talk, which would suggest the latter, but the individual verses are unclear in the Hebrew bible and literally need to be altered in any translation as there simply is no translation for the actual Hebrew, so you get people injecting personal feelings on the matter.  The ones you quote can be read as homosexuality is forbidden, prostitution is forbidden, or as group sex is forbidden, depending on who is translating and the message they want to put forward.   

[Yitzi]

Actually, the Bible doesn't really say much about gay marriage per se.  It says that male homosexuality is sinful, and therefore gay marriage is recognizing sin...but that gets into the question of how secular American law should interact with God's law...

Leviticus 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."1
Leviticus 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them."

The Bible is pretty clear on it. Sorry felt I had to respond.

No need to apologize.  However:

As I said, it says that male homosexuality is sinful.  On that, it's absolutely clear.  How that impacts on the question of gay marriage being recognized by a secular government is where things get very tricky.

The Bible is pretty clear on it. Sorry felt I had to respond.

I won't sully the thread by getting deeply into it here.  If you want a bible topic, I'm game. 

Maybe BUncle can just split off these discussions...

Fact is, those can be interpretted otherwise.  In fact, there is no evidence whether it was considered a moral sin or an unclean act (and there is a BIG difference)

No, there really isn't, in the Bible.  What you characterize as "unclean acts" are also sins.  The idea of "moral sin" external to "God said don't do it" is alien to the Bible.

The ones you quote can be read as homosexuality is forbidden, prostitution is forbidden, or as group sex is forbidden, depending on who is translating and the message they want to put forward.   

If they're translating straightforwardly, though, "male homosexuality is forbidden" is the most obvious meaning.

[Buster's Uncle]

I'll go find the gay marriage thread from a few months ago.

I'm not sure that it's at all off-topic here, though; it's certainly an issue in play in this presidential cycle.

[ColdWizard]

Factual correction; like pneumonia being misnamed because it's the same old monia that been around as long as lungs have, this is not a new strain at all - which is rather embarrassing to still have here in the future.

It's increasing because in the past it tended to be fatal but advances in medicine and technology have pushed those natural limitations much further away.

[Buster's Uncle]

Are you talking about pneumonia or willful ignorance?

[ColdWizard]

Are you talking about pneumonia or willful ignorance?

Ignorance, but I suppose it works for pneumonia too.

[Unorthodox]

Fact is, those can be interpretted otherwise.  In fact, there is no evidence whether it was considered a moral sin or an unclean act (and there is a BIG difference)

No, there really isn't, in the Bible.  What you characterize as "unclean acts" are also sins.  The idea of "moral sin" external to "God said don't do it" is alien to the Bible.

Many theologians agree the Pentateuch (the first 5 books of the hebrew bible, where the scriptures above come from) has two very distinct categories of sin evil.  Uncleanliness/Ritual sin and Moral Sin.  If you want me to start listing theologians, I will.

Uncleanliness falls into the category of eating unclean animals, inappropriate clothing, planting crops incorrectly, etc.  It is things the world does, but the Jews are forbidden to set themselves apart as God's people.  Contact with these things can be intentional or unintentional.  Contact makes the body an unclean vessel unsuited to that which is Holy.  This is not to claim they are neccessarily minor sins.  Some call for banishment or execution, others just a ritual cleansing. 

Moral sin, however, is willful rebellion against god.  Murder falls here. 

It is unclear which category homosexuality falls under, but is discussed alongside other unclean acts.  My point is, if we're going to use the Pentateuch as our guide on homosexuality, why then are we not advocating for the full measure of it to be enforced as well? 

The ones you quote can be read as homosexuality is forbidden, prostitution is forbidden, or as group sex is forbidden, depending on who is translating and the message they want to put forward.   

If they're translating straightforwardly, though, "male homosexuality is forbidden" is the most obvious meaning.

Ok, let's test that:

"V'et zachar lo tishkav mishk'vey eeshah"

"And with a male you shall not lay lyings of a woman"

So, make sense of lay lyings.  That is what translation boils down to.  Yes, most have gone with homosexuality traditionally, to claim that is the most correct or straight forward is to ignore other possible meanings.  It could just as easily read no threesomes. 

Then the second part is determining what it is considered:

toeyvah hee

We see above "Abomination" as the translation of Toeyvah.

Yet, elsewhere in the Pentateuch it is used to connote societally unacceptable behavior/a social taboo, and often translated as "offensive".  Why the inconsistent translation? 

[Buster's Uncle]

This ought to be an interesting exchange to follow...

[vonbach]

I know people that literally have gone back and translated the Bible word for word in the original languages. Heh.
Earning himself the equivalent in two phd s in the process. The Bible is pretty clear on the law and I have a compiled
handbook on it on pdf. 

http://www.giveshare.org/BibleLaw/lawhandbook/index.html

Certain things aren't supposed to be tolerated and homosexuality is among those things.
"Tolerance and apathy are the last virtues of a dying society" Aristotle

[Unorthodox]

I know people that literally have gone back and translated the Bible word for word in the original languages. Heh.
Earning himself the equivalent in two phd s in the process. The Bible is pretty clear on the law and I have a compiled
handbook on it on pdf. 

http://www.giveshare.org/BibleLaw/lawhandbook/index.html

Certain things aren't supposed to be tolerated and homosexuality is among those things.

As is judging others. 

I don't have to tolerate acts I find religiously offensive in my house or my church.  However, I also cannot condemn those that believe differently and act on their beliefs on their own terms.   

[vonbach]

As is judging others. 

I don't have to tolerate acts I find religiously offensive in my house or my church.  However, I also cannot condemn those that believe differently and act on their beliefs on their own terms.

Theres a difference between judging and discerning. We are required to discern and carry out the the law.

[Buster's Uncle]

The $64 question is what a Christian -anyone of any faith- is supposed to do in Caesar's 'democracy' that has in its basic rules that we don't legislate according to religious beliefs.  -Never forget that it'd been tried in Europe extensively and for a long time, and had many unfortunate shortcomings.