Chick-fil-A Vandalized in Torrance, CA ("Tastes Like Hate")

[WhistlinDave]

Here is New Testament scripture for you condemning homosexuality as sinful and evil:

Romans 1:26-32

Letter from Paul means nothing to me. He never met Jesus in the flesh. His guess as to what Jesus thinks is as good as mine.

Can no one produce for me a Bible chapter and verse where out of Jesus mouth came the words that having gay sex is a sin?

It's a very simple statement. Would've taken him a few seconds to say. And yet he didn't.

 

[phill4paul]

blah..blah blah..the Bible says...equal rights!....live and let live...Chistians rule!...Athiests rule!...blah..blah..blah...marriage is one man one woman!...the government shouldn't be involved in marriage...blah...blah..blah...America is a Christian nation!....America has a secular government!...blah...blah...blah....The founders were Christian!...The founders were part of the 'Enlightenment' movement!...blah..blah..blah...

I've been on these forums too damn long and feel like I'm living an example of Bill Murray's 'Ground Hog Day.'

 

[matt0611]

This is Jesus talking about hetero sex and marriage.

Still not Jesus saying homosexuality is a sin or abomination.

You can't be serious. There is only one marriage, not "hetero marriage".

No one can read the Bible or the words of Jesus in a serious manner and not recognize homosexuality as a sin, as all sex outside of marriage is, and there is no "homosexual marriage".

 

[RickyJ]

He didn't say they were having homosexual sex in Sodom. He gives a list of all the fun stuff they were doing, and gay sex acts are not in the list.

Sodom is referenced, but God destroyed the place because Lot couldn't find ten righteous men.

I think referencing the destruction of Sodom as an allegory to those who don't believe in Jesus, while not saying a word about homosexuality and listing all these other things, proves my point more than it does yours. He still didn't say a word about it being wrong.

You are completely ignoring Romans 1:26-32. No Jesus didn't say that in the flesh on Earth, but the apostles inspired by God did.

 

[matt0611]

Letter from Paul means nothing to me. He never met Jesus in the flesh. His guess as to what Jesus thinks is as good as mine.

Can no one produce for me a Bible chapter and verse where out of Jesus mouth came the words that having gay sex is a sin?

It's a very simple statement. Would've taken him a few seconds to say. And yet he didn't.

Terrible argument, Jesus did not give an exhaustive list of sins for us. The law was already in existence. He didn't come to abolish the law. Jesus quoted the old testament many many times as if it was God's word itself. In fact he quotes Leviticus more than any other OT book, and Leviticus lists homosexuality as a sin.

To assert that Jesus wouldn't view homosexuality as a sin is simply ridiculous.

 

[WhistlinDave]

Out of curiosity what does everyone think about the 'origins' of homosexuality. I have my opinions, but I'd love to hear someone else's.

It's been around since the beginning of recorded history. And hundreds of other animal species also do it, so it isn't just a product of man's sinful mind, or unnatural.

There are some studies that have been done with hamsters that says that if you add more hamsters in the same space, the more dense the population, the more hamsters who are gay. As they have babies and reproduce and the population grows, you get more and more gay hamsters.

My theory is it's nature's method of population control so that a species does not deplete their ecosystem of all the resources before it becomes unsustainable for them, ensuring the survival of the species. That's just my opinion though, no way to prove it of course.

And/or nature's way of providing more parents for orphaned children? I think there are about a quarter million kids in orphanages in the US at any given time, and it wasn't gay people who dumped them there. Lots of gay people do rescue them though, and give them loving homes their parents didn't. There definitely is something wrong destroying the family unit in America today but I don't think it's gay people. Just saying.

 

[jmdrake]

That's my point. Jesus was the teacher. Not anyone else. If one is a Christian then that means a follower of Christ.

So if someone can just provide me with a chapter and verse showing when Jesus said something about homosexuality or gays while he walked the earth as God Incarnate, then I will concede and happily agree that the proper thing to do as a Christian is to condemn homosexuality as sinful and evil.

Straight from the mouth of Jesus.

Matthew 19:4-6

New International Version (NIV)

4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’[a] 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

Now before you respond with "Well Jesus wasn't condemning homosexuality in that passage" neither was the owner of Chick-Fil-A! Seriously, the owner said he supported traditional marriage between a man and a woman just like Jesus said He supported traditional marriage between a man and a woman. Jesus could have said "Therefore one consenting adult shall leave the home of his or her parents and go be one with some other consenting adult"....but He didn't. Why is it okay with you for Jesus to say God made male and female distinct for the purpose of joining together in one flesh, but it's not okay for Christians to say that?

 

[WhistlinDave]

Terrible argument, Jesus did not give an exhaustive list of sins for us. The law was already in existence. He didn't come to abolish the law. Jesus quoted the old testament many many times as if it was God's word itself. In fact he quotes Leviticus more than any other OT book, and Leviticus lists homosexuality as a sin.

To assert that Jesus wouldn't view homosexuality as a sin is simply ridiculous.

Right. So now we're going in circles. He didn't come to abolish the law, but to fulfil it.

So back to my earlier posts. Why are people not lobbying for laws calling for adulterers to be stoned to death?

Or for rebellious children to be stoned to death?

Why aren't people protesting in front of Red Lobster because eating shellfish is an abomination?

And why did Jesus stop the crowd from stoning the adulteress to death when that was clearly defined under the law he did not come to abolish?

 

[jmdrake]

This is Jesus talking about hetero sex and marriage.

Still not Jesus saying homosexuality is a sin or abomination.

Fine. So your position is that gays can't get married but homosexuality isn't a sin. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[matt0611]

Right. So now we're going in circles. He didn't come to abolish the law, but to fulfil it.

So back to my earlier posts. Why are people not lobbying for laws calling for adulterers to be stoned to death?

Or for rebellious children to be stoned to death?

Why aren't people protesting in front of Red Lobster because eating shellfish is an abomination?

And why did Jesus stop the crowd from stoning the adulteress to death when that was clearly defined under the law he did not come to abolish?

Right, so you can't respond to the fact that Jesus had the same view of what is sinful as the old testament did.

Now your changing the subject to the *penalties* of sin, which is a different topic.

Jesus still viewed adultery as sinful.

 

[matt0611]

Right. So now we're going in circles. He didn't come to abolish the law, but to fulfil it.

So back to my earlier posts. Why are people not lobbying for laws calling for adulterers to be stoned to death?

Or for rebellious children to be stoned to death?

Why aren't people protesting in front of Red Lobster because eating shellfish is an abomination?

And why did Jesus stop the crowd from stoning the adulteress to death when that was clearly defined under the law he did not come to abolish?

Right, so you can't respond to the fact that Jesus had the same view of what is sinful as the old testament did.

Now your changing the subject to the *penalties* of sin, which is a different topic.

Jesus still viewed adultery and prostitution as sinful.

 

[WhistlinDave]

Straight from the mouth of Jesus.

Matthew 19:4-6

New International Version (NIV)

4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’[a] 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

Now before you respond with "Well Jesus wasn't condemning homosexuality in that passage" neither was the owner of Chick-Fil-A! Seriously, the owner said he supported traditional marriage between a man and a woman just like Jesus said He supported traditional marriage between a man and a woman. Jesus could have said "Therefore one consenting adult shall leave the home of his or her parents and go be one with some other consenting adult"....but He didn't. Why is it okay with you for Jesus to say God made male and female distinct for the purpose of joining together in one flesh, but it's not okay for Christians to say that?

It's OK for them to say it, and their right to believe it, it's their donations to groups working to pass laws making gay marriage illegal that I disagree with enough to make me not eat there.

They can do whatever they want with their money, it's their money. And we certainly don't need the government telling them they can't do business here or there. That's just more government interference and tyranny.

I just won't eat there because I don't want my money going to support lobbying for the creation of laws limiting freedom that I do not agree with. I can't speak for anyone else.

And I think the vandal was a jackass and should've taken out an ad somewhere to get his "artwork" out there, not infringe on the property owner's rights like that.

 

[WhistlinDave]

Duplicate post

 

[WhistlinDave]

Right, so you can't respond to the fact that Jesus had the same view of what is sinful as the old testament did.

Now your changing the subject to the *penalties* of sin, which is a different topic.

Jesus still viewed adultery and prostitution as sinful.

OK, I will grant you that, penalties vs. what is sinful.

So why is no one crusading against divorce? Or adultery? Or eating shellfish? Or shaving one's beard? Or wearing cotton polyester blends? Or planting two different seeds in the same row? Why is no one conducting bloody animal sacrifices as prescribed by the first nine chapters of Leviticus?

It's fine for Christians to take the position that something Jesus never said is still incorporated by reference to the Old Testament passages saying it's a sin, but then DO IT FOR EVERYTHING! Don't cherry pick this one sin and make a big deal about it. That's all I'm trying to say. It's inconsistent, i.e. renders the whole argument bullshit imo.

 

[jmdrake]

Right. So now we're going in circles. He didn't come to abolish the law, but to fulfil it.

Right. Fulfilling means "to keep".

So back to my earlier posts. Why are people not lobbying for laws calling for adulterers to be stoned to death?

Because Jesus told the woman caught in adultery "Neither do I condemn you, go and sin no more." For that matter nobody is lobbying for laws calling for gays to be stoned to death. Do you wish they would? There is no "Overturn Lawrence v Texas" movement in this country. Do you think there should be just so that Christians can be consistent in your eyes? Or can you see the difference between criminalizing a behavior (sodomy laws) and not sanctioning it?

Or for rebellious children to be stoned to death?

Christians today would be happy if the state quit arresting or threatening to arrest parents who spank while at the same time reserving the right to tazer toddlers and teens.

Why aren't people protesting in front of Red Lobster because eating shellfish is an abomination?

If you can't figure out on your own that you shouldn't eat this:

that's on you.

And why did Jesus stop the crowd from stoning the adulteress to death when that was clearly defined under the law he did not come to abolish?

Did you miss the "Go and sin no more" part of what Jesus said? Christ's position was neither to condemn sinners nor to condone sin.

 

[WhistlinDave]

Fine. So your position is that gays can't get married but homosexuality isn't a sin. Thanks for clearing that up.

LOL I didn't say that either. (Good one though.)

Jesus didn't mention gay marriage because in that day and age there was no concept of gays marrying. It simply hadn't come up for discussion yet. (Took a couple more thousand years.) So any discussion of marriage was in the context of heterosexual relationships, of course.

Of course you did have lots of gays back in those days (especially Romans) who had long term gay relationships with their slaves, etc. But the marriage discussion didn't come up until very recently.

Here's a really interesting article for you, at least I found it interesting. The author's allegation is that Jesus affirmed a gay couple when he healed a Roman soldier's gay love slave. (LOL)

http://www.wouldjesusdiscriminate.org/biblical_evidence/gay_couple.html

 

[jmdrake]

It's OK for them to say it, and their right to believe it, it's their donations to groups working to pass laws making gay marriage illegal that I disagree with enough to make me not eat there.

They can do whatever they want with their money, it's their money. And we certainly don't need the government telling them they can't do business here or there. That's just more government interference and tyranny.

I just won't eat there because I don't want my money going to support lobbying for the creation of laws limiting freedom that I do not agree with. I can't speak for anyone else.

And I think the vandal was a jackass and should've taken out an ad somewhere to get his "artwork" out there, not infringe on the property owner's rights like that.

Ummmm....how has Chick-fil-a lobbied for the creation of laws that limit freedom? My understanding is they're lobbying to protect existing laws that in their opinion protect the traditional definition of marriage. And some of us are lobbying to get rid of laws that cause people to look at marriage as a "set of rights" instead of a personal religious ceremony. It's like the government was attaching legal significance to being baptized. Bound to cause a fight even if the legal significance wasn't what people perceived it to be.

 

[matt0611]

OK, I will grant you that, penalties vs. what is sinful.

So why is no one crusading against divorce? Or adultery? Or eating shellfish? Or shaving one's beard? Or wearing cotton polyester blends? Or planting two different seeds in the same row? Why is no one conducting bloody animal sacrifices as prescribed by the first nine chapters of Leviticus?

It's fine for Christians to take the position that something Jesus never said is still incorporated by reference to the Old Testament passages saying it's a sin, but then DO IT FOR EVERYTHING! Don't cherry pick this one sin and make a big deal about it. That's all I'm trying to say. It's inconsistent, i.e. renders the whole argument bullshit imo.

You're confusing the ceremonial laws of Israel (polyester blends, seeds in the same row etc) with the moral laws (murder, adultery etc). They are separate things.

We don't need to sacrifice animals because they were only done before Christ because they pointed to his ultimate sacrifice, that's why they were repeated over and over. They never actually offered the forgiveness of sin, they were only a sign of faith pointing to the coming of the messiah who would bring righteousness. This is explained in the new testament.

And people should be crusading against adultery, its a sin.

 

[WhistlinDave]

I give you guys credit because I have to say, you debate this topic much more intelligently than Christians I have encountered anywhere else.

I think at some point we're going to have to agree to disagree because obviously I'm not going to change your mind, and you're not going to change mine.

I wish you all peace.

 

[phill4paul]

Why didn't Jesus become a Senator of Rome and change the laws the way he felt should be in line with the heavenly Father? Answer: His Kingdom was not of this world. Christians should consider this.
I'll accept the Christian B.S. that 'it isn't illegal for gays to get married' the day they take the power away from the state in regards to marriage. Otherwise, unless Christians give up the AUTOMATIC benefits granted them by the State for there 'traditional' marriage then they should just STFU.
Christians are protecting the benefits they receive, and making themselves feel 'holier than thou', by denying equal benefits to others. Plain and simple. Nothing more than that.