Ok, you just told on yourself. There is no standard by which Leviticus 20:13 is not really horrible. It was really horrible when it was conceptualized, it was really horrible when King James edited it, it was really horrible when Gutenberg printed it, and it’s really horrible now. I attend a UCC church and my pastors do not defend what the Bible says about homosexuality the way you just did. God is still speaking, I encourage you to listen.
Also, it’s universally accepted that Leviticus 20:13 is not a command for today. It was a law for Israel to show that even earthly means and men cannot keep Israel’s purity. Christ set us free from the law. We don’t need to kill each other for sinning. Because we cannot be pure. So Christ died to make us pure.
I attend a UCC church and my pastors do not defend what the Bible says about homosexuality the way you just did.
UCC has been known to be rapidly spiralling down into heresy. They say vague things like “God is still speaking” and that god for whatever reason always affirms what the white cultures believe is right. Convenient that your god changes his mind just to placate the culture about what white people living in the west think, huh. Once again like Israel of old, man thinks he stands in judgement over God.
for whatever reason always affirms what the white cultures believe is right.
I assume that by this you’re trying to paint homosexuality and the acceptance of it as exclusive to white cultures. This is complete and total bullshit.
There’s plenty of history of non-white cultures that were fully accepting of homosexuality. Japan is a clear example. Samurai wrote so many gay love poems to each other that they had established literary conventions about it.
What happened, around the world, is that colonizers and missionaries went around the world destroying indigenous traditions and customs and instilling bigotry regarding homosexuality. At the same time, suffering under the yoke of colonialism stifled social progress and the potential for the sort of organic social movements that happened in the West.
Even then, we are seeing in the US a rollback of LGBT rights that we only recently managed to achieve. I don’t think it’s fair to generalize “white cultures” as believing LGBT people have rights, just as it’s not fair to generalize non-white cultures as not believing that.
Christianity barely made a dent in Japan. It had extremely limited success in China. Yet same sex marriage isn’t allowed in these places. However, these places can be very materialistic and idolise work over the West. Doesn’t mean that materialism is good over there. There is an objective right and wrong.
And don’t get me started on Africa and Arabia - places wherein homosexuality is outright banned. While they were affected by colonialism more, why is it that it’s the “enlightened” west which did the colonialism is suddenly changing it’s mind on sexuality?
(Also, should go without saying, I am not in support of banning homosexuality or same sex marriage in a secular context - in fact, I firmly oppose doing such a thing.)
why is it that it’s the “enlightened” west which did the colonialism is suddenly changing it’s mind on sexuality?
At the same time, suffering under the yoke of colonialism stifled social progress and the potential for the sort of organic social movements that happened in the West.
Once again, telling on yourself. What’s not horrible about saying people should be put to death for their private consensual bedroom behavior?
That’s not answering my question. You need a definition of “horrible” to understand what isn’t “horrible”.
I’ll give you two suggestions:
Is “horrible” going against what the culture of white people living in the USA and their society says?
Or
Is “horrible” an objective wrong going against what the infallible objective and perfect creator of the universe says?
If you are a Christian then you’d believe the latter. It is also Christian belief that “all scripture is God-breathed” in regards to the old testament. So therefore Leviticus 20:13, in the way as God intended, isn’t horrible. Now some people’s interpretation of this scripture might be horrible - that possibly means you as well. I just see it as part of the law given to Israel to show as part of the wider narrative that humans are incapable of being perfect and that God needed to send a Saviour and prepare the way for Him. Didn’t Jesus command in John 8:1-11 not to stone someone to death, that we do not have the ability to stone someone to death because we aren’t perfect? And what did the only one there who could judge do? The literal Perfect Creator of the Universe - Whom is deserving of all Honour and Glory - was standing before her in Human Form. He forgave her, and what He said was “Go and sin no more.” There is nobody qualified on this earth to carry out Leviticus 20:13. And He who ascended into Heaven and is seated at the Right hand of God the Father is qualified, offers forgiveness.
I don’t think you’re even reading what I’m saying at all. I literally said that man does not have the authority to carry out what’s described in Leviticus 20:13 due to our sinful nature. I debunked any possible “let’s kill gay people” reading you could have gotten from it by giving the context. I don’t see how that is “dangerous”. In fact, just flat out ignoring your own scriptures because your misunderstanding of it makes you feel uncomfortable and not engaging with it is very dangerous.
I’ll ask you this if you’re actually willing to engage here: What would you say makes someone a Christian?
That’s not even what it says. The Bible doesn’t really mention homosexuality too much.
But what it says about it is really horrible.
By what standard?
Ok, you just told on yourself. There is no standard by which Leviticus 20:13 is not really horrible. It was really horrible when it was conceptualized, it was really horrible when King James edited it, it was really horrible when Gutenberg printed it, and it’s really horrible now. I attend a UCC church and my pastors do not defend what the Bible says about homosexuality the way you just did. God is still speaking, I encourage you to listen.
How do you define “really horrible”?
Also, it’s universally accepted that Leviticus 20:13 is not a command for today. It was a law for Israel to show that even earthly means and men cannot keep Israel’s purity. Christ set us free from the law. We don’t need to kill each other for sinning. Because we cannot be pure. So Christ died to make us pure.
UCC has been known to be rapidly spiralling down into heresy. They say vague things like “God is still speaking” and that god for whatever reason always affirms what the white cultures believe is right. Convenient that your god changes his mind just to placate the culture about what white people living in the west think, huh. Once again like Israel of old, man thinks he stands in judgement over God.
I assume that by this you’re trying to paint homosexuality and the acceptance of it as exclusive to white cultures. This is complete and total bullshit.
There’s plenty of history of non-white cultures that were fully accepting of homosexuality. Japan is a clear example. Samurai wrote so many gay love poems to each other that they had established literary conventions about it.
What happened, around the world, is that colonizers and missionaries went around the world destroying indigenous traditions and customs and instilling bigotry regarding homosexuality. At the same time, suffering under the yoke of colonialism stifled social progress and the potential for the sort of organic social movements that happened in the West.
Even then, we are seeing in the US a rollback of LGBT rights that we only recently managed to achieve. I don’t think it’s fair to generalize “white cultures” as believing LGBT people have rights, just as it’s not fair to generalize non-white cultures as not believing that.
Christianity barely made a dent in Japan. It had extremely limited success in China. Yet same sex marriage isn’t allowed in these places. However, these places can be very materialistic and idolise work over the West. Doesn’t mean that materialism is good over there. There is an objective right and wrong.
And don’t get me started on Africa and Arabia - places wherein homosexuality is outright banned. While they were affected by colonialism more, why is it that it’s the “enlightened” west which did the colonialism is suddenly changing it’s mind on sexuality?
(Also, should go without saying, I am not in support of banning homosexuality or same sex marriage in a secular context - in fact, I firmly oppose doing such a thing.)
These social movements came about after we decolonised
Once again, telling on yourself. What’s not horrible about saying people should be put to death for their private consensual bedroom behavior?
Oh give me a break. “No true Christian” much?
That’s not answering my question. You need a definition of “horrible” to understand what isn’t “horrible”.
I’ll give you two suggestions:
Is “horrible” going against what the culture of white people living in the USA and their society says?
Or
Is “horrible” an objective wrong going against what the infallible objective and perfect creator of the universe says?
If you are a Christian then you’d believe the latter. It is also Christian belief that “all scripture is God-breathed” in regards to the old testament. So therefore Leviticus 20:13, in the way as God intended, isn’t horrible. Now some people’s interpretation of this scripture might be horrible - that possibly means you as well. I just see it as part of the law given to Israel to show as part of the wider narrative that humans are incapable of being perfect and that God needed to send a Saviour and prepare the way for Him. Didn’t Jesus command in John 8:1-11 not to stone someone to death, that we do not have the ability to stone someone to death because we aren’t perfect? And what did the only one there who could judge do? The literal Perfect Creator of the Universe - Whom is deserving of all Honour and Glory - was standing before her in Human Form. He forgave her, and what He said was “Go and sin no more.” There is nobody qualified on this earth to carry out Leviticus 20:13. And He who ascended into Heaven and is seated at the Right hand of God the Father is qualified, offers forgiveness.
You are the reason a lot of folks don’t trust Christians. Just under the surface, you (personally) are dangerously homophobic.
I don’t think you’re even reading what I’m saying at all. I literally said that man does not have the authority to carry out what’s described in Leviticus 20:13 due to our sinful nature. I debunked any possible “let’s kill gay people” reading you could have gotten from it by giving the context. I don’t see how that is “dangerous”. In fact, just flat out ignoring your own scriptures because your misunderstanding of it makes you feel uncomfortable and not engaging with it is very dangerous.
I’ll ask you this if you’re actually willing to engage here: What would you say makes someone a Christian?
I was once where you are now.