January 04, 2005

Hypothetically speaking

Ok this is yet another blog entry aimed at my mystery commenter known as Jimbob, for all those that are sick of me blogging about him I'm sorry, but I really want to know his beliefs, and what he is hoping to achieve by bothering to tell me them. I am grateful that he is bothering to tell me them though, I think it's important for people to hear both sides, we can't expect to know or understand one's beliefs unless they are explained to us, he has as much right to his as I do to mine.

Ok so we are agreed that any sex other then procreative sex is wrong as far as the catholic religion goes, be it straight or otherwise, i'm not going to argue with that, that's fair enough. Sex for pleasure is a totally different issue which I'm sure could be debated forever but I have no iterest in going into that. It's a shame you didn't go on more about the Gay'ism part, that's the part I'm interested in. Let me propose a hypothetical situation to you:

Let's hypothetically say that I don't have gay sex, which for these purposes I mean any activity leading to orgasm (Mum, if you still read then this isn't hypothetical at all, your little boy wouldn't get up to such activities). So, I don't have sex, and thus don't have sinful orgasms, how would you view me then? Would you still hate me for doing nothing more than loving another man? Lets also say that I have no intention of wanting to get married to another man, I am perfectly happy having a loving, sex free, relationship with him, would that be wrong?

I guess what I am really asking is this, is it just because we partake in sexual activities with each other that makes it sinful? Am I right in thinking the bible says something along the lines of "You shall not lie with a man as with a woman" - Leviticus 18:22 which only condemns doing homosexual acts, not homosexuality itself? What's your view on this? I am also aware that marriage is the joining of a man and women and symbolises something to do with a join between the couple and god, fair enough that gay marriage should be wrong in the fact its not the union of a man and a women, but surely two men should be allowed to show a union between them and god.

Do you believe we should follow the bible and other such documents completely or that it's enough to love and believe in god and that if you live your life in a good way, ie don't break the law, cheat on your partner, have sex outside of marriage or have non-procreational sex, that your soul will be spared and you'll get your place in heaven?

I know I aimed this at Jimbob, but anyone else who wishes to comment then please do so and if I've made any factual errors then I'm sorry and please do correct me.


- 10 comments by 2 or more people Not publicly viewable

[Skip to the latest comment]
  1. taken literally that quote can mean:

    thou shalt not have vaginal intercourse with a man.

    or for the lesbians:

    thou shalt not go down on lover and find penis

    hmm, that last one was a bit zen…

    04 Jan 2005, 01:14

  2. To be honest, most of it is open to interpretation, and also translation as the bible wasn't written in English as most should know.

    04 Jan 2005, 01:24

  3. Mathew Mannion

    The Bible was not sent down on a cloud from heaven. It was written by man as a history book to chronical times and is split into two time periods, the old testament and the new testament. The Old Testament is completely analogous, and the New Testament is conflicting history of the start of Christianity, where hundreds of gospels were written and the four that were chosen still contradict each other.

    04 Jan 2005, 01:29

  4. Awww, shame, and yes you'll be able to see me in work if you so wish, I won't know who you are though.

    04 Jan 2005, 17:14

  5. Well, OK, gay sex is an abomination. It's wrong and no gay man should be allowed to live, let alone practice any form of sexual intercourse with another man.

    However, does that mean that people are allowed to sell their daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7?

    We should also put to death anyone that works on the Sabbath (Exodus 35:2) – does that count to the Jewish Sabbath as well?

    People with a vision defect also are not allowed to approach the altar of God as stated in Leviticus 21:20, and men are strictly forbidden to have their hair trimmed, as it says in Leviticus 19:27.

    You're also not allowed to wear clothes that contain mixed fibres, such as cotton and polyester – if you do, the whole town must tstone you to death, as commanded in Leviticus 24:10–16.

    So there we go – just so you all know where you stand with regards the Bible.

    X

    04 Jan 2005, 17:30

  6. Mathew Mannion

    I very much doubt you'd have any effect at all.

    04 Jan 2005, 23:20

  7. "marriage is the joining of a man and women" Not so much factual errors but rather comical typos. Nice comment by Andrew as well. I'd say a relationship between two men or two women, as a union between the two of them and God is possible, as it probably happens in business or other activities – it's not a marriage however in the sense that it is defined in the Bible.
    The hypothetical relationship you're talking about resembles (I think) the relationship between David and Jonathan (1 Samuel 18–20; 2 Samuel 1). They declare their love for one another and it's written in the Bible, the Word of God (right?) so I'd see this as a union between the two men and God. Without any suggestions of homosexual desires of either David or Jonathan for the other. I guess even with homosexual desires it would be possible, as long as no acts are committed (already discussed earlier on your blog). This is how I read the Bible.

    05 Jan 2005, 01:01

  8. Jimbob, I get a bittersweet feeling about your departure. While I doubt many will mourn the passing pollution of a possible troll, it would be nice to imagine that we could eventually have a civilising influence on you.

    So, erm, good luck or something.

    – Jordan

    05 Jan 2005, 20:09

  9. Matthew Jermyn

    I'm a Christian of the 'bible is pretty solid' variety. Gonna say a few things about some of this. First – the right attitude for any Christian to have when talking about something like this is something along the lines of tact, love, gentleness etc, and I mistrust my ability to manage all that in text – so sorry if I come across wrong.

    As far as I've got to know what God's like, the following things are true:
    – Anyone, especially any Christian, hating any person, for any reason, and justifying it using scripture is an abomination on a 'peeing on the ark of the covenant' scale.
    – Any Christian claiming that GOD hates anyone on any basis whatsoever is probably a worse abomination.
    – The Christian response to both of those positions is not just anger, it is wrath. This however is mostly unproductive, so next is calming down and trying to gently explain to people why they're preaching vile heresy. Don't be misled by the fact you normally only see the second bit.

    Next

    One comment above seems to quote Leviticus and Exodus as being how Christians would live if they followed All the rules correctly. This would imply that Christians are fairly selective about the bits of the bible they follow, at best out of ignorance.

    This is inaccurate. There is a perfectly good reason to not follow those rules. We're not Jewish.

    This is a basic point about the fundamental nature of Christianity – that it is a replacement of Judaism, a different way of doing things, etc. This is not a 'you can see it both ways' kinda thing, itís very very clearly written. Those rules do not apply to Christians as they did to Jews.

    This does not mean we're meant to ignore the Old Testament. But we don't treat it in the same way.

    Homosexuality is talked about in the New Testament Ė i.e. the bits written post Jesus (though it should be noted that Jesus himself is not recorded as mentioning it) and those are the bits that should be talked about – they have more weight to them as they can't be dismissed as part of the old way of doing stuff.

    Next. Some things in the post.

    About condemnation of homosexual acts only, not homosexual orientation – this is a very common position.

    This way of looking at it has no problems with homosexuals being Christian, but would basically say if you are homosexual it's probably best treated as a call to singleness – and Christianity is agreed by all to be a call to obey God.

    As a slight aside, singleness in the bible isn't looked on as being 'bad' or even a position where the person is missing out Ė itís the opposite, point being that the extra devotion to God they get to do is more than adequate compensation (Sorry, Ďdevotion to Godí is actually meant to sound like an enjoyable thing!). Obviously, this only applies to Christians.

    Finally. (rejoice!)

    Christian views on heaven's entry requirements are not that you have to have been sufficiently Good, just that you have to have been forgiven for all you've done that's bad. In terms of getting into heaven, it's a case of how 'good' you've been is irrelevant. It's not a reward for good behaviour.

    In other words, the only biblical position is that you can get into heaven after breaking the law, cheating on your partner, having non-procreational* sex outside marriage and ONLY ever do those things – as long as you ask for forgiveness afterwards (genuine asking for forgiveness involving being genuinely sorry and thus probably wonít be followed by going out doing the same stuff again.)

    Ok. Enough. What Iíve aimed to do is show that you can be a Christian who believes the bible is more or less solid (application of intelligence necessary) without being homophobic. If I havenít managed that, let me know and I'll attempt to clarify.

    God bless, and other good things to anyone who reads this :D.

    matt

    *er. Not being negative about catholicism – but I don't see a problem with non-procreational sex. In marrige.

    06 Jan 2005, 00:07

  10. Thanks Matt. The people commenting so far (including myself) seem to be on two sides of the fence:

    Homosexuality is fine for Christians;
    Homosexuality is so wrong, for everyone, everywhere, anyhow.

    It's nice to see a contrast to both approaches.

    06 Jan 2005, 13:28


Add a comment

You are not allowed to comment on this entry as it has restricted commenting permissions.

January 2005

Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su
Dec |  Today  | Feb
               1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31                  

Search this blog

Galleries

Most recent comments

  • HAHA i did this to you!!!! and now….. IM YOUR WIFE!!!! by Sarah on this entry
  • You think that's clever – in my first year at Rootes, I used to regularly swim rootes lake after a n… by SuperAl on this entry
  • Maybe its just me, but I feel most people dont fancy there friends sexually. Physical attraction to … by Debbie on this entry
  • You are stupid enough to believe everything in the newspaper especially the 'News of the world' Half… by Amy Ayreshire on this entry
  • Jesus Christ is a false god. At best all Christians can hope for is partial credit. The advent of th… by god is a computer on this entry

Blog archive

Loading…
Not signed in
Sign in

Powered by BlogBuilder
© MMXXII