Dumbledore's Gay

[jefferiah]

It should be pointed out that by the time of the Nicean council, most of the persecuting of christians was by christians. The council was necessary because the were various schisms in the church and Constantine was worried that fratricidal chaos would sweep the empire unless an orthodox theology was put into place. What he did was to invite all the players; the bishops of every church in the empire to debate and to vote on matters canonical and theological. The easiest part of thir job was the canon, because the form we know now had been pretty much in place since around 150AD (or 2nd century)....the hard part was theology dealing with issues that for the most part are over most people's head and off today's radar screen (was christ made of the same substance as god or did christ become the same substance for example). At the time riots were taking place in alomost every major city between the followers of the various thoughts. Constantine's move brought peace and unity.

That's true too. There were various schisms. And I think that council was called mainly because of certain sect called Arianism, not to be confused with white supremacists. So while there is a great deal of conjecture about how certain things were decided upon here and certain things were tossed from the mainline faith, and what was tossed it is no more than conjecture. I think that probably the most orthodox of the ideas and that the most orthodox of the books in the Canon were probably chosen with good reason. Things like the Gospel of Thomas for example. Having read that I think you can easily say its sort of an odd man out. It reads less like the Gospels and more like Khalil Gibran's The Prophet. No story, just a bunch of The Master said this and this and this.

[M.Dancer]

No, I'm sorry, I believe that 10th century BC refers to the period 999 to 900 BC, so therefore, 10th century BC and 1000 BC are NOT the "same date".

Oh, but we are talking about the dating according to your secular, scientific view of history, are we not? First you're referring archeological records of camel distribution, but when the dates don't jive you suddenly become an evangelical Christian and claim that the Torah was written by Moses and therefore 1000 BC is not prehistoric.

It don't matter when writing first occurs; we're talking about historical records in the Torah that refer to camels... and how archeological records show that they are in fact prehistoric in the region.

Still, I'd like to see your sources.

I am not an evangelical christian but I have been a biblical student. Therefore I would never claim the Torah was written by Moses.

It is probable that they are first domesticated in Arabia some time after 1500 BC. By about 1000 BC caravans of camels are bringing precious goods up the west coast of Arabia, linking India with the Mediterranean and Mesopotamia.

http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainT...;HistoryID=ab57

[guyser]

God-haters, anti-Christians, those of the general persecutorial bent.

...not to forget of course the Fag-Hater Pro-Christians , who at times have a real persecutorial bent.

But they have a tendancy to perpetuate myths.

[M.Dancer]

And Harry Potter Marries the cute Wesley girl, Hermione and Ron have a gaggle of kids...

....and no one is traumatized by Dumbledor's celibate homosexuality.....

[kengs333]

...not to forget of course the Fag-Hater Pro-Christians , who at times have a real persecutorial bent.

But they have a tendancy to perpetuate myths.

I'm not sure sin can actually be "persecuted," but that aside, all gay bashings that I can think of were perpetrated by atheistic drunken rednecks or college students. Ironically, gays are "persecuted" by other sinners and anti-Christians. Go figure.

All true Christians "hate the sin, not the sinner" although the word hate is a litte too crass. Any Christian will tell you that all sinners have the ability to repent and accept Christ as their personal saviour. Unlike the bleak secular humanist worldview that basically condemns people what they allow themselves to become with no chance at redemption. Hence, someone who makes a mistake while a youth and beds multiple partners, one of which ends up in producing a child, guy turns into an irresponsible deadbeat. She pretty much has to live a life of guilt and regret for being so irresponsible and immoral according to secular worldview and try to overcome this shame by engaging in further such behaviours in a vain attempt to mask the pain and legitimize such a lifestyle. Quite a sad way to live, really.

[jawapunk]

Wow this topic has turned so fast into a Biblical debate my head is spinning. Kengs? you are right about the quick spread of Christianity, I shoudn't have said that. I meant simply in terms of numbers because it did not become a potent force until a few hundred years after Christs death when it finally became the official religion of th Roman Empire. That is still not to say that there was a majority, simply that the Emperor took it as his religion (on his death bed).

Jefferiah, I find it difficult to counter what you state. It is true that I cannot dispute an earlier version of the New Testament in written form existed. However, scholars have stated that it was passed orally until finally written. This is not to say as you have said a version was recorded. In either case I would still surmise there was error in many of the first person accounts the Bible holds because of the period between the events themselves and the time it was put to paper. Also who wrote these versions? Was it the apostles or someone else? Were the apostles able to read and write? Did they transcribe?

This error is further pronounced when you take into account the many translations from an oral tradtion in Aramaic and Greek. Finally written in Greek, then latin then the various European dialects. Then you have to also take into account transcription error as there were no computers/hard disks /printing presses.

Also I am not discussing the dates of copies but originals and also scholars don;t only use modern bibles to surmise when the older biblical books were written. The bible wasn't the only thing being written, especially within the Roman empire, who kept records and census's and a hoard of other written works.

My head is still spinning but I think my original point was that with all of that how do we really know what Jesus thought about gays?

Anyways, you make some good points, atleast more convincing than anything kengs has said. Oh and just so you know 10th century B.C.E. actually refers to 1000-1100 B.C.E. Hope that helps that earlier discussion.

Edited November 21, 2007 by jawapunk

[jawapunk]

Backing up a bit. Can anyone justify why being gay is immoral? Or is it simply because there are a few vague statements in the Bible? Where do these statements go to God hating gays and that they will go to hell?

Are there any passages that claim to directly quote Jesus as stating this?(I know I said direct quotes cannot be trusted in this but I am intersted in the mindset and where it comes from). Also as homosexuality clearly isn't within the 10 commandments, is it gods law that is is wrong or simply homophobes projecting their own values upon a belief system?

[M.Dancer]

Backing up a bit. Can anyone justify why being gay is immoral? Or is it simply because there are a few vague statements in the Bible? Where do these statements go to God hating gays and that they will go to hell?

Are there any passages that claim to directly quote Jesus as stating this?(I know I said direct quotes cannot be trusted in this but I am intersted in the mindset and where it comes from). Also as homosexuality clearly isn't within the 10 commandments, is it gods law that is is wrong or simply homophobes projecting their own values upon a belief system?

Nothing from Jesus...but mainly from leviticus amonst the various proscriptions against eating unclean foods, women and their unclean periods, shaving the corners of your beard and pretty much all the stuff we gave up after Peter and paul had their epiphany about what to expect from Gentiles....so in effect, if you are a gentile it's okay but it isn't kosher......

[kengs333]

In terms of numbers it's difficult to say. It seems like there was a rapid increase in numbers, then a decrease after the fall of Jerusalem, then a steady increase again despite widespread persecutions. Early critics of Christianity like to point out the type of people that Christians converted; non-intellectuals, slaves, housewives and convicts--people who basically were non-entities in Roman society; Christianity gave them hope, meaning, and equality. The latter is lost on many now because of what formalized, institutionalized Christianity became and still is. The true intent of Christianity is to make all who accept Christ as their saviour and believe in God equals--and that was a direct threat to the Roman social order in particular. So yes by the time of Nero Christians were already the vicim of choice for Roman bloodsports. One can only wonder how many were martyred--I doubt it was few. There were also a number of different sects, and, if one wants to believe the critics of Christianity, some of these were pretty bizarre.

10th century BC/BCE encompasses 999-900 BC; what would 99-0 BC be if it did not? The zero-eth century?

[jawapunk]

10th century BC/BCE encompasses 999-900 BC; what would 99-0 BC be if it did not? The zero-eth century?

Your right, I'm an idiot. I was doing it in my head an skipped a number, as in 0-100 is 1st, 100-200 is 2nd but then i did 300-400 is third instead of 200-300. OOPS!!! And I even did a History Minor, Ha!

But yeah I understand it spread but was definitely a minority religion and quite small until it was endorsed by the state.

[GostHacked]

Kengs333

Do you like Elton John?

Lance Bass?

Man, there are so many fags out there, and lesbians making great music, it is almost a shame to shun them for them being immoral, but colour me rainbow if their grooves aren't making me shake my bootay.

I have done plenty of Dj work and have actually DJ'd a drag queen show. Those 'bitches' knew I was green in this area, but the 'queens' just said "Don't worry dahling, you play music, we dance, people watch, and we have fun. I tell you this was in my fave top 5 events that I have DJ'd at. One of them made such a magnificent transformation that I eventhough I knew she was a HE, I could just contain myself from jumping 'her'. I knew the package was there, but those pants made my mouth water, like most ladies would KILL for an ass like that, and this guy has it. I really had a lot of fun doing that event. Thunderous applause after each 'girl' did their bit.

I also did some karoke in a gay bar, and I actually hit some of the gay bars now and then. A friend of mine WHO IS GAY, is a bartender at the gay bar, and is also a local artist. His paintings are showcased at the bar, and he has sold some great works. He has also been with the same guy for over 5 years. Who never knew fags can commit. Oh and Keng, they are both in their early 30's, and I can tell you, they like men, not boys.

[jawapunk]

I am actually not homophobic and consider myself accepting of gays but I can't stand Lance Bass and old Elton John was much better. I don't think liking music written by a gay has much to do with accepting gay relationships or not.

Trust me, you are not going to make a dent in Kengs armour with an argument like that.

[cybercoma]

Rue,

Your kind of jabbering about Christianity has been going on from day one, so don't think you're accomplishing much by doing this except re-inforcing negative stereotypes. Christians have always been persecuted by your kind; Christians have always been the victims, regardless of how history gets twisted to seem otherwise. But that's okay; we all know where you're headed, so it's safe to say that the ability to wantonly malign and persecute without consequence in this mortal world is small consolation for the prize that awaits your kind.

How does asking someone to justify and/or rationalize their beliefs constitute "persecution"? When someone makes a wild claim, they're always required to back it up with facts and reason... unless it's religious "faith", then it's a virtue to spout opinion and claim it as fact.

Newsflash... "Showing your work" on a math test is not persecution to students. Using logic, showing facts and reason when saying there is an invisible entity in the sky that punishes us for allowing same sex humans to love one another is NOT persecution.

[cybercoma]

I'm not sure sin can actually be "persecuted"

This is scary, scary thinking.

[cybercoma]

Backing up a bit. Can anyone justify why being gay is immoral? Or is it simply because there are a few vague statements in the Bible? Where do these statements go to God hating gays and that they will go to hell?

Are there any passages that claim to directly quote Jesus as stating this?(I know I said direct quotes cannot be trusted in this but I am intersted in the mindset and where it comes from). Also as homosexuality clearly isn't within the 10 commandments, is it gods law that is is wrong or simply homophobes projecting their own values upon a belief system?

God's divine word says woe unto the soul of homosexuals and that they should be exiled or put to death.

Jesus never said anything about it, but the book of Timothy includes homosexuals with the unholy and Paul says being gay will keep you out of heaven, on top of other not so nice things he says about homosexuals (like they should be put to death).

So yeah, the Bible... not real keen on the same-sex love.

[jawapunk]

Now see that's a good start, but I am more interested in the actual passages you are referring to. I just want to read it for myself.

Not to sound ignorant, but what is God's divine word and where can that be found? Because does God actually have words spoken in the New Testament or is it merely through people as vehicles?

[jennie]

This is so sad and disturbing. So basically JKR creates a series of books that gets children hooked and then in then end slams them with a revelation that one of the characters is gay, thus forcing young--some very young--children to accept notions of sexual deviance that they shouldn't have to.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_7...000/7054074.stm

You are sick.

[M.Dancer]

Now see that's a good start, but I am more interested in the actual passages you are referring to. I just want to read it for myself.

Not to sound ignorant, but what is God's divine word and where can that be found? Because does God actually have words spoken in the New Testament or is it merely through people as vehicles?

Start at leviticus chapter 1 verse 1.

And yes, God has actual words in the NT...whole sentences even...

[jawapunk]

Yeah but is it him speaking or through someone else. Also Leviticus is the thrid book of the Old Testament or the Torah. It mandates male circumcision. Does that mean if you aren't you are also immoral? There are also alot of rules there that regular Christians break every day. Why would one rule be taken so much more seriously than others? It isn't underlined is it? hehe

Edited November 22, 2007 by jawapunk

[jawapunk]

How about Romans 10:4

"Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes."

There are so many contradictions not only from the Old to the New Testament but within each as well. How can someone solidly come out and say homosexuality is immoral when there are statements that seem to make it fine for anyone no matter who they are to be saved as long as they believe in Jesus?

[M.Dancer]

How about Romans 10:4

"Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes."

There are so many contradictions not only from the Old to the New Testament but within each as well. How can someone solidly come out and say homosexuality is immoral when there are statements that seem to make it fine for anyone no matter who they are to be saved as long as they believe in Jesus?

That's the thing. You can't take one passage and understand the whole anymore than taking one spoonful and understanding the buffet.

This is a word I detest and this is probably the only context I will ever use it.....but to grasp any of the varied thoughts on christianity, you have to take a holistic (yech spit) approach to all the scriptures and have a good grasp on the culture of the times.

[M.Dancer]

Yeah but is it him speaking or through someone else. Also Leviticus is the thrid book of the Old Testament or the Torah. It mandates male circumcision. Does that mean if you aren't you are also immoral? There are also alot of rules there that regular Christians break every day. Why would one rule be taken so much more seriously than others? It isn't underlined is it? hehe

God speaks directly (though the angels) to Mary and her cousin, and directly (through the Holy ghost) at the baptism.

[jawapunk]

But if I read the Bible back to front and still allow that homosexuality is not immoral or a sin, I am wrong? If I choose to interpret it differently how am I wrong? Isn't that wasn't Protestant religion is all about? And didn't during the Reformation and Counter -Reformation people pretty much damn each other to hell for interpretation? Shoudn't we also then suggest that in a few hundred years or less, homosexuality will be wholly accepted?

[jazzer]

But if I read the Bible back to front and still allow that homosexuality is not immoral or a sin, I am wrong?

As been said countless times, if homosexuality was that sinful, Jesus might have said at least something about it. But nada.

[M.Dancer]

As been said countless times, if homosexuality was that sinful, Jesus might have said at least something about it. But nada.

On the otherhand, he didn't say anything about doing goats or smuggling either.....