Don’t believe that you’ve made the claim that you, DS, are someone who follows scripture.

Which makes me wonder why you are even interested in trying to use bitblt’s belief against him.

bitblt understands that DS is a specialist in discovering hypocrisy and inconsistencies. bitblt further understands that that everyone likes to do what they do best.

It is not clear to bitblt whether or not DS is at all influenced by scripture. Otherwise, bitblt believes that DS would not be trying to beat bitblt with his own belief.

I, bitblt, believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and that belief in Christ is the way to eternal life. Scripture is story of how the Creator, God, gave people the ultimate sacrifice for their sins: Jesus Christ.

bitblt further believes that Matthew 19, verses 4 and following, where Christ references the Genesis account of God making a man and a woman one flesh in marriage, is the ultimate authority as to appropriate sexual behavior.

Matthew 19
“Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’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’? So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.”

Christ was a Jew. That’s why he quotes Genesis to answer questions about adultery – an inappropriate sexual behavior. He could have quoted the Law, but He was apparently interested in intent – God’s intent.

Note the phrase, “Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.” Believe this phrase is commonly used in modern day marriage vows.

bitblt further believes that this scripture answers the question of, “What is appropriate sexual behavior?” for all Christians.

Based on you assertion, you cannot use Leviticus to complain about same-sex relationsips, as you are not a Jew.

bitblt can certainly use all of the Old Testament for learning, which is what the New Testament says is the purpose of the Old Testament. Since appropriate and inappropriate sexual behaviors are topics in both the OT and NT, the OT is a useful resource.

It is true that as a Christian bitblt has no obligation to participate in the accusation, condemnation, or execution of those guilty of capital crimes under the Old Testament Law of Moses. It’s also true that as a Christian bitblt has no desire to participate in the accusation, condemnation, or execution of those guilty of capital crimes. It is the case that a Jew, under the Law of Moses, who makes an accusation, is expected to throw the first stone. However, under this Law there must be more that one accuser.

bitblt refers to himself in the third person because it’s a reminder that ideas are under discussion, not personalities.

In other words: you have proven yourself to be a “pick & choose” ‘c’hirsitan who only uses verses of the Bible that fit your prejudices.

Based on you assertion, you cannot use Leviticus to complain about same-sex relationsips, as you are not a Jew.

“Don’t believe this is a claim that you’ve made.” Comment by bitblt — January 21, 2008 @ 12:23 pm

I just did, and you are unable to sustain your argument.

“bitblt is a tenth generation American.” Comment by bitblt — January 21, 2008 @ 12:24 pm

Bitbit has been listening to Fmr. Sen. Dole too long, and now refers to Bitbit as “bitbit” rather than “I” or “me” or “myself”.

The song by Sxhoolhouse Rocks about “Rufus Xavier Sasparilla” might give you a few pointers on how American English works.

bitblt is a tenth generation American.

Justify this statement using the New Testament or using the words of Christ or any of the Apostles and I’ll respond to your post. Until you can do that I’ll consider this your opinion.

Christians are not Jews.

Even Bitbit must agree that when someone “claims” to follow the scripture, then turns around and ignores scripture, then their hypocrisy is so fragrant it would make political mudlsinging smell like roses.

Don’t believe this is a claim that you’ve made.

Otherwise, see

Comment by bitblt — January 21, 2008 @ 9:20 am

I think I see where you’re getting confused. I’m not trying to use the “Golden rule” in an attempt to spin what’s in the Bible. I’m using the rule to explain the logic of the “c”hristian Right.

IF the “c”hristian Right are following this rule, then they are acting in the way they want others to treat them.

They “pick & choose” one verse in the Bible to support their prejudice while completely ignoring verses that don’t support their prejudice.

Even Bitbit must agree that when someone “claims” to follow the scripture, then turns around and ignores scripture, then their hypocrisy is so fragrant it would make political mudlsinging smell like roses.

When one verse in Leviticus concerning same-sex relations MUST be followed, but then another verse in Leviticus about killing children whoi curse their parents MUST be ignored, evin Bitbit cannot support that kind of hypocrisy.

Unless Bitbit is a hypocrite himself. (Herself?)

So, Bitbit, what is it? Is Bitbit a hypocrite, or will Bitbit condemn the hypocrites who “claim” to follow scripture?

Why does Bitbit refer to Bitbit as “Bitbit”? Are you not a native American English speaker, where you refer to yourself as your name rather than “I” or “me”???

Comment by Democrat Soldier — January 21, 2008 @ 8:06 am

I think that you’re trying to make the case that the Bible, and Christ himself, permits homosexuality. bitblt will require considerable more persuasion that this.

This is the post on the Golden Rule (commonly known as but not a Biblical term) to which bitblt responded:.

He’s also showing his lack of comprehension of biblical teachings which espouse The Golden Rule above all else: Love thy neighbor as thyself which translates into “total tolerance” of the lifestyles of others. He’s a pretty textbook “christo-hypocrite” – most radical christofascists are!

Comment by Veritas — January 17, 2008 @ 2:49 pm

Doesn’t this poster say, in essence, that Christ says it’s Ok to tolerate sin because the others have to tolerate sin in you. The Golden Rule does not translate into “’total tolerance’ of the lifestyle of others.” I believe this poster is trying to say that because Christ stated the Golden Rule, Christians have to tolerate homosexuals.

That’s not what the Golden Rule is about, and in my opinion, this poster is perverting scripture. He’s saying that Christ tolerates sin. How could anyone say this about the man who said that if you look at a woman lustfully, you’ve committed adultery with her in your heart. Christ raised the level of appropriate behavior to heights unknown in the Old Testament when He said it’s not just about actions, it’s about attitude. The Golden Rule is about attitude.

The verses to which this post refers are as follows:

http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=Matthew+7&version=31

Matthew 7:12

So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

The “Law and the Prophets” to which Christ refers are the Law of Moses and the precepts of the Prophets. Doesn’t the Law of Moses, the book of Leviticus, plainly condemn some behaviors, especially illicit sexual behaviors such as incest, adultery, and homosexuality.

Christ says that when one avoids these behaviors he doesn’t cause others to participate in these behaviors.
It’s simple. You don’t want another man to commit adultery with your wife, so don’t commit adultery with another man’s wife. Isn’t this like the ultimate in respect when one respects the relationship between a man and a woman. Isn’t this the respect everyone desires.

The Law is still about avoiding sin. Christ never sets that aside – certainly not in the Golden Rule.

You’re looking at the Bible from a distinctly non-”c”hristian perspective. Doncha know that some verses of the Bible aren’t recognized by these self-described “c”hristians? It’s known as the “pcik & choose” “c”hristian Right approach to the Bible!

To these “c”hristians, the Bible is full of verses that just don’t apply at all. It’s only the ones that (oh-so conveniently) fit their prejudices that are important and the rest are meaningless.

How so? Do the previous verses change the statement “it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a camel than it is for a rich man to enter into Heaven”? No, they don’t. Still unsure what you mean by being disingenuous, unless you’re talking about yourself and your “pick & choose” approach to the scriptures.

“And as to your account of the Golden Rule, are you intentionally perverting scriptures now?” Comment by bitblt — January 18, 2008 @ 3:59 pm

Not even by your wild stretch of the imagination! If we are expected to treat others as we would have them treat us, then the “c”hirstian Right want gays to pass legislation that would ban “c”hristians from being able to adopt children, and to pass legislation that would make it legal for “c”hristians to be fired for their religious views.

Unless you’re being disingenuous yourself!

28th. Homosexuals must be killed
‘If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.” (Leviticus 20:13)

29th. Jesus is Lord of the United State, all infidels must be executed
(Replaces the 1st Amendment)
“ If a man or woman living among you is found to have worshiped other gods, take the man or woman who has done this evil deed to your city gate and stone that person to death.” (Deuteronomy 17:2) “Everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, must to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.” (2 Chronicles 15:12)

30th. Slavery is again legal in the United States
(Replaces the 13th Amendment)
“Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5) “When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property.” (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB) “Slaves, submit to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate but also to those who are harsh.” (1 Peter 2:18 )

31st. Working on Sunday is forbidden and will be punished by death
“Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God.” (Exodus 20:8)
“On six days work may be done, but the seventh day shall be sacred to you as the Sabbath of complete rest to the Lord. Anyone who does work on that day, shall be put to death. (Exodus 35:2)

32nd. All children who curse their parents will be executed
” ‘If anyone curses his father or mother, he must be put to death. He has cursed his father or his mother, and his blood will be on his own head. (Leviticus 20:9)

33rd. Adultery will be punished by the death penalty
“If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:10)

34th. Women who have premarital sex will be executed
“If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the girl’s virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death.” (Deuteronomy 22:20)

35th. Wives must always submit to their husbands
“You wives will submit to your husbands as you do to the Lord. For a husband is the head of his wife as Christ is the head of his body, the church; he gave his life to be her Savior. As the church submits to Christ, so you wives must submit to your husbands in everything.” (Ephesians 5:22-24 NLT) “Wives, be subordinate to your husbands, as is proper in the Lord.” (Colossians 3:18)

36th. Blasphemy will be punished by death
“Anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD must be put to death. The entire assembly must stone him. Whether an alien or native-born, when he blasphemes the Name, he must be put to death.” (Leviticus 24:16)

37th. Children who strike a parent will be punished by death
“Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death.” (Exodus 21:15)

38th. Parents may sell their daughters into slavery
“When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again.” (Exodus 21:7)

This entire line of reasoning is disturbing. Huckabee, and those like him, are comparing mutual, consensual acts and contractual agreements between adults with illegal sexual acts and relationships with minors and with animals.

Gay marriage and polygamy do NOT hurt straight marriage. They are not a slippery slope towards bestiality and pedophilia.

The entire argument is bunk. It is a pure projection of personal, generally religious-biased views upon everybody else around them. They cannot prove that ANYONE besides those having their rights taken away are being hurt.

Who is hurt when a gay couple marries, or when a consensual polygamous partnership is entered? Absolutely no one. On the contrary, such marriages, such partnerships are generally a stabilizing factor in a person’s life.

Who is hurt when a gay marriage or consensual polygamous partnership is prevented from being joined by those CONSENTING ADULTS wishing to do so? Certainly those being prevented from entering a legitimate legal contract. Certainly those religious institutions that recognize the sanctity of such a union. Anyone besides those involved in the relationship? No way, no how.

This is the exact same bullsh#t argument that was used to justify anti-miscegenation laws (aka laws banning interracial marriage).

Selfish fundamentalist a$$holes.

Join the Atheist Revolution.

Matthew 19:6..20

Now a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”

“Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the commandments.”

“Which ones?” the man inquired.

Jesus replied, ” ‘Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, honor your father and mother,’ and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’”

20″All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?”

Obviously Christ was concerned with the young man’s behavior, actions, and his respect for the law.

It’s disingenuous of you not to include this.

And as to your account of the Golden Rule, are you intentionally perverting scriptures now?

I must agree with Bitbit on this patricular issue. The Golden Rule was a way to explain to the people at the time that you shouldn’t stone your neighbor for following rules that you don’t agree with. One should accept that some people just don’t agree with your rules and should be treated with the same courtesy that you would expect of them towards you. This does not mean that if they threaten your life that you should curl up and die. This rule was more about the perry “rules” that some peope cling to just so they can feel better about themselves and use to “bash” their neighbors over the head in an attempt to raise themselves higher in their own eyes.

I don’t go around saying “Hey, straight couple holding hands! Stop shoving your sexuality in may face! Keep it in the bedroom!”, so they should treat me the same way. That is, if they subscribe to the Golden Rule.

Some have jokingly said that when the (non)-Rev. Phelps shows up at a funeral with signs “God Hates Fags” that we should show up at his “church” and play Black Sabbath at loud levels. it would, of course, be treating him in a similar fashion as he treats others, and dince he “claims” to follow scripture, it is only fitting that he reap what he sows, it would also be wrong.

Perosnally, I like the totally unambiguous verse about rich people not being able to buy theuir way into heaven: Mathew 19:21-24

21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. 22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.

23 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. 24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

Nothing can be mistranslated about that one! ;-)

Comment by Veritas — January 17, 2008 @ 2:49 pm

Huckabee well understands the Golden Rule.

“The Golden Rule above all else:…” I don’t think so.
“…translates into ‘total tolerance’ of the lifestyle of others…” That’s not even close.

Remember Christ was interest in both attitudes and actions. This interest is in contrast to the Jewish Law which is about actions. In the Golden Rule Christ tells how to have the attitude that leads to the proper actions.

Here’s the rest of the story.

Matthew 7:12

So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

Note that Christ doesn’t say there is something wrong with the Law and the Prophets. He says this attitude – the Gold Rule – produces the attitude to understand how to follow the Law and the Prophets.

The Law referenced in this verse would include sexual sin, which Christ condemns elsewhere, as well as murder. You don’t want someone to hate you to the point that they want to murder you, so don’t you hate someone to the point that you want to murder them. You don’t want someone to commit adultery with your wife, so respect the rights of another husband to have his own wife. If you don’t commit adultery with another man’s wife, then you and she are both safe from punishment. You can make the application to homosexual sin, which is also condemned by the Law.

So what is above all else? Love God and love your neighbors as yourself. The Gold Rule looks to be a variation on “…love your neighbor as yourself..” When Christ says these two: “Love God and love your neighbors as yourself,.” he’s suggesting you can only do the second by doing first. It seems likely, at least to me, that one can’t perform the Golden Rule unless they are willing to put the Love of God above their personal desires – including the sexual desires.

This verse follows the Golden Rule.

Matthew 7:13

“Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

Could you succinctly explain how same-sex marriage will make your marriage dry up and blow away? There has still not been one single explination that makes any kind of sense from anyone.

Ummm, maybe all the bearded Republicans will come out of the closet and dump their “beards” for a partner more to their “style”….

Just a thought….

Cheers,

“A man and a woman – a husband and a wife in a marriage – produce offspring. This is what God intended. It is beneficial to both the family and to the society in which they live. When children are born outside of a marriage it is destructive to the people involved, as well as to the society.

If this is not good enough for you, then you can tell the Creator!”

Procreation is necessary for the species to continue, but to assume that children born out of wedlock will bring destruction to the society ignores historical precedence. Adultry is nothing new, and is almost as common in the Bible as it is in the US. Just because a man and woman marry does not mean they will have children. If that’s the only reason for opposite-sex marriage, let’s pass some laws that require children when marriage happens!

“The Bible never says, “Thou shalt commit polygamy!” ”

No, but the Bible never says “Thou shall NOT commit polygamy!” and I dare you to find ten Biblical verses that outlaw polygamy! Just because the Bible neve says “Thou shall…” does not mean it implies “Thou shall not…” Come on, prove a negative to me and everyone on this forum! I would really love to see that one.

“Be that as it may, that doesn’t change the fact that scripture says a man and a woman will be “one flesh” and Jesus endorses this as the Creator’s intent in Matthew 19.”

The Bible also states quite clearly that women should shut up when they are in Church, and I haven’t seen anyone on the left OR right argue that they should.

Can we both agree that there is more in the Bible that is ignored than is followed, or are you playing “pick and choose” with scripture as well?

As for the intent, marriage is something that has seen more changes between its inception and now than can be claimed between the inception of the US and the last turn of the century. For some reason, it’s only the last 50 years that have conservaitves screeching like bashees. Are they not students of history?

Could you succinctly explain how same-sex marriage will make your marriage dry up and blow away? There has still not been one single explination that makes any kind of sense from anyone.

Actually, they can, and did.

No they can’t, and they didn’t. They simply “perverted” the meaning of marriage. I don’t recognize and same-same gender couple as “married.” Think you can make me?

If you want, I’ll explain how two same-sex people can become “one flesh”. . . . . ;-) (Oh, come on! You’ve got to find SOME humor in this argument of ours! Unless you’re not really human. . . .)

This is a subject that demands gravitas so please skip any humor associated with the mechanics of homosexual sex. People suffer over gender issues and you want to go for a cheap laugh.

I believe you’re deliberately perverting scripture by making this remark. This one flesh designation from Genesis reflects God’s invitation for mankind to participant in creation expressed in Genesis 1:28. “…be fruitful and multiple…”

A man and a woman – a husband and a wife in a marriage – produce offspring. This is what God intended. It is beneficial to both the family and to the society in which they live. When children are born outside of a marriage it is destructive to the people involved, as well as to the society.

If this is not good enough for you, then you can tell the Creator!

If you follow scripture, then women can marry when they “grow into womanhood”. “Womanhood” can begin as early as 9 years of age, averages around 12-13. Do you support scripture in that regard?

You really need a book, chapter, and verse to support your suggestion…especially the part about the ages.

Scientifically, since the age at which this seems to happen has been decreasing, you can’t assume that that age was the same age 2000, 3000, or more years ago. Nonetheless, would it be wrong for a woman to marry at 13? No. Would it be a good idea in twenty-first century U.S.A? Not in my opinion.

My opinion is that woman in the Old Testament were protected emotionally and physically by their families, by their fathers, and by their husbands to an extent that can only be imagined in the present day. They were also protected by a tradition of sanctity of marriage.

This sanctity is destroyed when a sexual relationship between two same-same gender people is called a marriage. But destroying that sanctity is what this is all about, isn’t it?

How about the practice of polygamy, which is widespread in the Bible. Do you support that portion of the scripture?

The Bible never says, “Thou shalt commit polygamy!” Further, I’m not a Jew, and Apostle Paul makes it more than clear that one doesn’t have to be a Jew to be a Christian.

The practice of polygamy is not wide spread in the Bible. Believe you can count the number of recorded instances of polygamy among God’s people on one or two hands.

Nowhere in the Bible is it endorsed, encourage, or permitted. It happened, and in most cases the Bible remarks on the negative consequences resulting from the practice. Much of the Old Testament is history and not does not require repeating.

If you want to say Conservative Christians don’t deal with scripture correctly, fine. Be that as it may, that doesn’t change the fact that scripture says a man and a woman will be “one flesh” and Jesus endorses this as the Creator’s intent in Matthew 19.

Comment by Don in Texas

That is exactly why the fascist fundies want a Constitutional amendment to ban same sex marriage. They understand that, if the issue ever came before the Supreme Court, it would be forced to rule in favor of the Constitution and make same sex marriage legal.

Actually, they can, and did.

If you want, I’ll explain how two same-sex people can become “one flesh”. . . . . ;-) (Oh, come on! You’ve got to find SOME humor in this argument of ours! Unless you’re not really human. . . .)

If you follow scripture, then women can marry when they “grow into womanhood”. “Womanhood” can begin as early as 9 years of age, averages around 12-13. Do you support scripture in that regard?

How about the practice of polygamy, which is wide-spread in the Bible. Do you support that portion of the scripture?