United States Christianity, History, and US Politics

[Bacle]

I wasn't really sold by fried's arguements on the matter, but if this how you're going to make the counterpoint I'm halfway tempted to disagree with you just out of spite.

At least you're honest that you'd rather side with people out of spite than out of reason. I mean that half of why I think you say the election wasn't stolen, is to spite Trump and the 'uncouth' but honest nature of what he has brought to the GOP.

That doesn't address the points I made at all, and it's wrong on top of that. Both in the nitpicky way (Christianity post dates the iron age by about, oh....500 years), and in more fundamental aspects. The fact that the world has changed is irrelevant, because humans, and human nature have not. What's so different about mankind today that if you told someone from 3000 years ago about it, that they just wouldn't be able to handle it, because it's so totally alien to their view of morality? Because that sort of thing has happened, there was a group of aborigines that had been living a pre-Neolithic lifestyle without knowing what was going on in the rest of Australia until they encountered modern civilization in 1984, and they managed the transition pretty well.

Human nature doesn't change much, that's true, but the influence of tech and increased knowledge (like germ theory, or realizing the Earth doesn't revolve around the sun) massively shifts how human nature is expressed and the context it operates in.

 

[Buba]

Isn't there this whole portion of the Bible where God literally nukes two cities for practicing homosexuality, bestiality, and incest?

It is more complicated than that. The locals wanted to boff God's Angles and God - showing his cultural imperialism, disdain for local customs, GASP! rejection of multi-kulti - nuked them for their non-binary sexual practices and for pushing and exploring the boundries of male sexuality.

Nevertheless the Bible says something along the lines of:
When a man has sexual intercourse with another man as with a woman, both men are doing something disgusting and must be put to death. They deserve to die.
See below for other translations:

Leviticus 20:13 - Bible Gateway

www.biblegateway.com

Bestiality and incest get the same treatment.
However, girl-on-girl action is not mentioned hence (probably) is kosher.

That's the Jewish Bible though, hence - depending on one's strain of Christianity - might not be applicable and/or binding. Nevertheless Jesus - somewhat sidestepping the question, as he was asked about divorce - speaks of marriage as being between a woman and a man. And Saint Paul clearly condemns homosexuals (and is more aware of female autonomy than previous Jewish wits, as he possibly includes lesbians too).

 

[Battlegrinder]

Human nature doesn't change much, that's true, but the influence of tech and increased knowledge (like germ theory, or realizing the Earth doesn't revolve around the sun) massively shifts how human nature is expressed and the context it operates in.

Again, that doesn't actually address the point, and in fact misses the point once again, particularly when it comes to germ theory. Before germ theory, lots of people thought like you, that they didn't need those outdated tribal bronze age superstitions, "a gentleman's hands are always clean" and so on, and lots of people died of inflection. Meanwhile, those broze age idiots got it right (or right enough), because religious sanitary laws represented centuries of experience and practices that actually worked, even if the society that invented them didn't know why (and/or God told them to do it because he knows best and they wouldn't understand the reasoning anyway. Take your pick of what you believe).

As for "shifting the context of human nature and how it operates"....no, I don't believe that's true. If that was the case, then reading most historical literature would be very difficult, because the mindset of the people then would be too alien to us because of their different expression of human nature or whatever. Why do you think the Epic of Gilgamesh, a story about man's pride, desire for companionship, and fear of death, is so enduring, even though it was written by people that though forged iron was high tech? Why do we teach our children morality using the same tales that the ancient Greeks did?

 

[strunkenwhite]

Q. 932. What is the fourth? [of the four sins that cry to Heaven for vengeance]
A. To defraud working men of their wages, which is to lessen, or detain it from them.
Q. 933. What proof have you of it?
A. Out of Eccl. xxxiv. 37. “He that sheddeth blood and he that defraudeth the hired man, are brethren,” and out of James v. 4. “Behold the hire of the workmen that have reaped your fields, which is defrauded by you, crieth, and their cry hath entered into the ears of the Lord God of Sabbath.”

You'd likely have better luck prioritizing trying to criminalize wage theft over trying to do it to homosexual activity. It's probably more common too.

 

[DocSolarisReich]

You'd likely have better luck prioritizing trying to criminalize wage theft over trying to do it to homosexual activity. It's probably more common too.

Both should be equally reviled. And when I am King, they will be.

 

[Captain X]

You should probably spend some time learning what Christians actually believe, before you go around calling them hypocrites. The prohibition on mixing cloth types is old testament mosaic law, which Christians are explicitly not bound by.

I used to be Christian, so I know that's from the same book where the "a man should not lay with another man as he would a woman" bit comes from which is always used to justify discrimination against gays, yet while the one about cloth types and others are ignored, that is the one that always gets adhered to. Why? Also, you'll have to tell me what part of the Bible says anything against lesbians, because I can't recall any passages about that.

 

[strunkenwhite]

I used to be Christian, so I know that's from the same book where the "a man should not lay with another man as he would a woman" bit comes from which is always used to justify discrimination against gays, yet while the one about cloth types and others are ignored, that is the one that always gets adhered to. Why? Also, you'll have to tell me what part of the Bible says anything against lesbians, because I can't recall any passages about that.

On the one hand, there are also New Testament justifications; on the other, you can hardly be blamed for pointing to the Old Testament stuff when so many Christians point to the Old Testament stuff.

 

[DocSolarisReich]

On the one hand, there are also New Testament justifications; on the other, you can hardly be blamed for pointing to the Old Testament stuff when so many Christians point to the Old Testament stuff.

The Laws set forth in the Law and the Prophets are not all equal. Some are general divine legislation for all times and places. Some are the national laws of a particular people in a particular place. Yet others are the legislations of ritual purity for making sacrifices in the temple. That law (for example; laws of dietary purity or clothing purity) has been specifically set aside by the New Covenant; we have a New Temple and a New Sacrifice.

 

[Captain X]

On the one hand, there are also New Testament justifications; on the other, you can hardly be blamed for pointing to the Old Testament stuff when so many Christians point to the Old Testament stuff.

I know there's some New Testament "justificiations," but Leviticus is the one everyone goes to for their justification, ergo, that should mean all the other stuff from that book should hold true, too, if one was to be consistent, yet most Christians ignore the majority of that book.

 

[Battlegrinder]

I used to be Christian, so I know that's from the same book where the "a man should not lay with another man as he would a woman" bit comes from which is always used to justify discrimination against gays, yet while the one about cloth types and others are ignored, that is the one that always gets adhered to. Why? Also, you'll have to tell me what part of the Bible says anything against lesbians, because I can't recall any passages about that.

As strunk said, the prohibition against homosexuality is repeated in the new testament, in 1 Corinthians 6:9, 1 Timothy 1:10, and Romans 1:26-27. All of those passages condemn both male and female homosexuality, the latter one explicitly.

As for Leviticus being citied instead of those, it's the same concept, but just in a much more clear cut and direct form, so that's really just a choice of rhetoric.

 

[Urabrask Revealed]

I really don't get the hyper-focus on "don't wear clothes made of two seperate kinds". The only cloth I wear that is mixed, are my jeans with 75% cotton and 25% synth or whatever. If this is so important, then I will try to find only clothes with 100% singular cloth.

 

[Captain X]

It is always, ALWAYS cited specifically. So if you're already going to pick and choose, why must you pick that one to follow?

 

[King Arts]

I used to be Christian, so I know that's from the same book where the "a man should not lay with another man as he would a woman" bit comes from which is always used to justify discrimination against gays, yet while the one about cloth types and others are ignored, that is the one that always gets adhered to. Why? Also, you'll have to tell me what part of the Bible says anything against lesbians, because I can't recall any passages about that.

Ok that was banned by the ancient Judaic law code at the time. Now christians here will tell you some things don’t apply. But you know what let’s ignore that for the argument let’s pretend everyone is still bound by all the applicable commandments. Now what is the penalty imposed for mixed fabrics? I don’t think it’s death not every crime was punished with death. The more serious the crime the bigger the punishment. Murder is serious because the penalty is death, homosexuality also carries the death penalty that shows god is severely opposed to it. While theft in ancient Israel was punished with a fine of double the value of the item stolen. So thieves are less serious to God then sodomites and murderers.

 

[DocSolarisReich]

It is always, ALWAYS cited specifically. So if you're already going to pick and choose, why must you pick that one to follow?

What kind of autiste thinks that he can pull the text out of its tradition of jurisprudence?

 

[LindyAF]

I really don't get the hyper-focus on "don't wear clothes made of two seperate kinds". The only cloth I wear that is mixed, are my jeans with 75% cotton and 25% synth or whatever. If this is so important, then I will try to find only clothes with 100% singular cloth.

I like 100% cotton stuff myself and try to get it when I can, it feels better & I liked to go with natural materials when I can. Not for religious reasons, I'm just concerned about microplastics in the environment and try to cut down on stuff that might contribute to that in my personal life (including synthetic fibers).

 

[Bear Ribs]

The Mosaic Law Code is specifically rescinded at Acts 15.

5But some believers from the party of the Pharisees stood up and declared, “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the law of Moses.”

Over the next few verses the Apostles discuss the matter. Peter begins speaking afterwards.

10Now then, why do you test God by placing on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear? 11On the contrary, we believe it is through the grace of the Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.”

The law of Moses is a yoke nobody can bear and is contrasted with the Grace of Jesus. Peter further details their reasoning over several verses but here's the conclusion:

19It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not cause trouble for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20Instead, we should write and tell them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals, and from blood.

So everything from the Old Testament except idolatry, sexual immorality, strangled things, and blood is kaput. Circumcision is out, cloth of mixed threads is in, and you don't need to sacrifice animals anymore.

 

[Urabrask Revealed]

So everything from the Old Testament except idolatry, sexual immorality, strangled things, and blood is kaput. Circumcision is out, cloth of mixed threads is in, and you don't need to sacrifice animals anymore.

... and we couldn't even do that right.

 

[Bear Ribs]

... and we couldn't even do that right.

To be fair, by definition (and spelled out in the scripture as well) God's law is perfect. Sinful humans can never perfectly follow it, that's why a provision (via Christ) for the forgiveness of sins was needed in the first place.

 

[Buba]

I'm just concerned about microplastics in the environment and try to cut down on stuff that might contribute to that in my personal life (including synthetic fibers).

Unmixed organicness is Godliness?


Seriously - good for you. I'm all for voting with one's wallet for what one feels is Right.

 

[DocSolarisReich]

To be fair, by definition (and spelled out in the scripture as well) God's law is perfect. Sinful humans can never perfectly follow it, that's why a provision (via Christ) for the forgiveness of sins was needed in the first place.

It's why we sing this in every Divine Liturgy:

Celebrant: 'Holy Gifts for Holy People!'
Response: 'One is Holy! One is Lord! Jesus Christ! To the glory of God the Father, Amen!'

It's a reminder to us.