21559

神经网络昆斯林的新闻组分类2006

Xref: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu soc.religion.christian:21559
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!rutgers!igor.rutgers.edu!geneva.rutgers.edu!christian
From: [e-mail] (Mail Server)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: homosexual issues in Christianity
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 13 May 93 06:29:25 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]
Lines: 76
Approved: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Bryan Whitsell) sent in a list of verses 
which he felt condemn homosexuality.  [e-mail] (Michael Siemon) wrote in 
response that some of these verses "are used against us only through incredibly 
perverse interpretations" and that others "simply do not address the issues."

In response, I wrote:
>I can see that some of the above verses do not clearly address the issues, 
>however, a couple of them seem as though they do not require "incredibly 
>perverse interpretations" in order to be seen as condemning homosexuality.
> 
>"... Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolators, nor adulterers, 
>nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, 
>nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom  of God.  And such were 
>some of you..."  I Cor. 6:9-11.
> 
>Would someone care to comment on the fact that the above seems to say
>fornicators will not inherit the kingdom of God?  How does this apply
>to homosexuals?  I understand "fornication" to be sex outside of
>marriage.  Is this an accurate definition?  Is there any such thing as
>same-sex marriage in the Bible?  My understanding has always been that
>the New Testament blesses sexual intercourse only between a husband
>and his wife.  I am, however, willing to listen to Scriptural evidence
>to the contrary.
[remainder of my post deleted]  The moderator then made some comments I would 
like to address:

>[There's some ambiguity about the meaning of the words in the passage
>you quote.  Both liberal and conservative sources seem to agree that
>"homosexual" is not the general term for homosexuals, but is likely to
>have a meaning like homosexual prostitute.  That doesn't meant that I
>think all the Biblical evidence vanishes, but the nature of the
>evidence is such that you can't just quote one verse and solve things.

If you are referring to the terms "effeminate" and "homosexuals" in
the above passage, I agree that the accuracy of the translation has
been challenged.  However, I was simply commenting on the charge that
it is an "incredibly perverse" interpretation to read this as a
condemnation of homosexuality.  Such a charge seems to imply that no
reasonable person would ever conclude from the verse that Paul
intended to condemn homosexuality; however, I think I can see how a
reasonable person might very well take this view of the verse.
Therefore I do not believe it is "incredibly perverse" to read it in
this way.

>I think your argument from fornication is circular.  Why is
>homosexuality wrong?  Because it's fornication.  Why is it
>fornication?  Because they're not married.  Why aren't they married?
>Because the church refuses to do a marriage ceremony. Why does the
>church refuse to do a marriage ceremony?  Because homosexuality is
>wrong.  In order to break the circle there's got to be some other
>reason to think homosexuality is wrong.
> 
>--clh]

Actually, I wasn't thinking of the church at all.  After all, a couple
doesn't have to be married by a minister.  A secular justice of the
peace could do the job, and the two people would be married.  My point
was that it is easy to find a biblical basis for heterosexual
marriage, but where in the Bible would one get a Christian marriage
between two people of the same sex?  And if you do see a biblical
basis for same-sex marriages, how willing would gay Christians be to
"save themselves" for such a marriage and to never have sexual
intercourse with anyone outside of that marriage relationship?  Please
note that I am not trying to imply that gay Christians would not be
willing to be so monogamous, I am genuinely interested in hearing
opinions on the subject.  I have heard comments from gays in the past
that lead me to believe they regard promiscuity as one of the main
points of being homosexual, yet I tend to doubt that gays who want to
be Christian would advocate such a position.  So what is the gay view?

- Mark

[Yes, I agree that a reasonable person might conclude that Paul is
condemning homosexuality.  I was responding to certain details of
your posting.  That doesn't mean I agree with Michael in all
respects.  --clh]