Quote:
Originally Posted by deepimpact2
With respect to your first statement I am interested to know how you arrived at that conclusion since I never listed the scriptures I was referring to.
|
Point well taken. I assumed (and yes, I know what happens when one assumes
) that you were referring to the Judeo-Christian Scriptures in general, and perhaps to the specific passages in those Scriptures that deal with homosexual behavior, for three reasons. First, this post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by deepimpact2
As for it being "dumb because it's based on the Bible," you should be very careful saying things like that.
And that's all I'm going to say about that.
|
Second, in my experience (which may be limited in this regard), it is primarily Christians and Jews who refer to holy writings as "Scripture." (Okay, I've heard Hindus do it as well, but I was betting that wasn't applicable here.)
And third, in my experience (and see the disclaimer for point 2), it is mainly some Christians who refer to particular passages of the Bible as "scriptures" (rather than referring to the whole thing as "Scripture" and specific verses as "verses" or "passages of Scripture.")
From that assumption, I assumed you were referring to the various well-known verses on the subject. If my assumptions were incorrect and fulfilled the old adage on my part, my apologies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by deepimpact2
With respect to the second statement...how is that relevant?
|
When you said "The scriptures I am referring to are pretty clear in stating that homosexuality is a sin," you were responding to statement from DrPhil:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrPhil
"Clearly listed as a sin" is very subjective because Scriptures can be interpreted differently. Some Scriptures seem more straightforward than others but many Christians pick and choose which Scriptures to interpreted verbatum and which to "spin" to suit whatever cultural norms, practices, and agendas.
|
My point was simply that Jesus made
very clear that divorce and remarriage for any reason other than the adultry of the spouse were sinful. (Matthew 5:31-32 and Matthew 19:1-10.) Admittedly, he diverged from Mosaic law on this point. (Mark 10:1-5.) And this view, for the most part, held in the Christian world for centuries. But now, I'd hazard a guess that many if not most Christians do not view these verses as naming remarriage after divorce as sinful
per se, despite their plain language.
Like DrPhil said, there is a long history of interpreting Scripture in different ways, so that what some see as clear, others see as not clear at all (or see clearly and differently).
Threaded Mode
