The Straight Dope

Go Back   Straight Dope Message Board > Main > Great Debates

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-26-2006, 04:47 PM
HeelB4Zod HeelB4Zod is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
If homosexuality is so sinful, why isn't its prohibition one of the 10 Commandments?

I've never read the Bible, and I'm woefully ignorant on pretty much all Bible/religion-related subjects. But I do seem to recall that in the Bible, homosexuality might have been considered a greater sin than your average run of the mill sins (drunkenness, sloth, greed, etc.) because God saw it (the act, not the sinner) as an abomination.

I think it's interesting considering that homosexuality was a topic that was covered and dutifully condemned in the Bible, why wasn't homosexuality specifically forbidden in the 10 Commandments?

Theories, anyone?
Reply With Quote
Advertisements  
  #2  
Old 05-26-2006, 04:58 PM
Happy Clam Happy Clam is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Nah, homosexuality isn't particuarly dumped on, any more than eating shellfish is. Of course, God destroys Sodom and Gomorrah, but he destroys Lot's wife, too, for a trivial an offence as looking over her shoulder when she was told not to. There's lots of stuff in the Bible that's frowned on (cutting hair, dietary requirements, etc.) that isn't explicitly detailed in the Ten Commandments. I would guess that they are meant to be a catch-all guide to morality, in that nearly everything immoral is caught in them (a sort of ancient "do no harm").

Also, note that a strict reading of the Ten Commandments might well prohibit any form of desire (including sexual, and thus homosexual) under the "Do Not Covet" clause. Any bible scholars there to tell me I'm full of it?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-26-2006, 05:00 PM
Der Trihs Der Trihs is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: California
Posts: 36,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeelB4Zod
I think it's interesting considering that homosexuality was a topic that was covered and dutifully condemned in the Bible, why wasn't homosexuality specifically forbidden in the 10 Commandments?
Because it isn't that big a deal. You'll note that Christ said nothing on the subject ( and some think Jesus was gay himself, in fact ). He made his position clear on lots of things; if homosexuality was so earthshaking an evil, he'd have mentioned it.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-26-2006, 05:07 PM
magellan01 magellan01 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
[QUOTE=Der Trihs]... and some think Jesus was gay himself, in fact...

I haven't heard this. Who thinks Jesus was gay?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-26-2006, 05:13 PM
Dunderman Dunderman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by magellan01
I haven't heard this. Who thinks Jesus was gay?
I doubt you can find a historical figure about whom it has never been said that he/she was gay. If you mean "who thinks Jesus was gay and has a semi-sensible reason for thinking so?", the answer is probably "nobody".
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-26-2006, 05:15 PM
Der Trihs Der Trihs is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: California
Posts: 36,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by magellan01
I haven't heard this. Who thinks Jesus was gay?
I've heard it's a theory being bounced around mostly in Europe, based on some line about Jesus having a "special love" for one of the Apostles; John, I think. I don't know the details.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-26-2006, 05:18 PM
HeelB4Zod HeelB4Zod is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Clam
Also, note that a strict reading of the Ten Commandments might well prohibit any form of desire (including sexual, and thus homosexual) under the "Do Not Covet" clause. Any bible scholars there to tell me I'm full of it?
But isn't it "Do not covet thy neighbor's wife", thereby only implying heterosexual coveting (assuming no points were taken off back then for tablets using non-gender-neutral language)?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-26-2006, 05:21 PM
GIGObuster GIGObuster is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
[QUOTE=magellan01]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Trihs
... and some think Jesus was gay himself, in fact...

I haven't heard this. Who thinks Jesus was gay?
Well, if Jesus was gay that would make the ideas in the Da Vinci code false. (Anything to falsify that piece of misleading fiction would help IMHO)

A good overview of the pro and con evidence for the ďJesus was gayĒ angle can be found in the Religious tolerance web site:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jegay.htm
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-26-2006, 05:26 PM
Happy Clam Happy Clam is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeelB4Zod
But isn't it "Do not covet thy neighbor's wife", thereby only implying heterosexual coveting (assuming no points were taken off back then for tablets using non-gender-neutral language)?
Fantastic! So the Bible not only not prohibits homosexuality, the Ten Commandments implicitly condone it! Maybe we should put them up outside courthouses after all.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-26-2006, 05:27 PM
Vlad/Igor Vlad/Igor is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
An interesting re-wording of the question would be: Why do we [Christians] pay an inordinate amount of attention to 10 Levitical laws and ignore the other 600? What makes those more important (even if they don't specifically mention homosexuality) than the other laws?

Vlad/Igor
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 05-26-2006, 05:38 PM
Jake Jake is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: NC, USA
Posts: 3,395
I dunno, but it seems to me homosexuality = no children = less worshipers= less money to the church = less power of the church = less power to the operators of the church.
I'm guessing the church and its operators don't like this much.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-26-2006, 05:45 PM
Maastricht Maastricht is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Dutch in the Netherlands
Posts: 8,021
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad/Igor
An interesting re-wording of the question would be: Why do we [Christians] pay an inordinate amount of attention to 10 Levitical laws and ignore the other 600? What makes those more important (even if they don't specifically mention homosexuality) than the other laws?
The choice of which laws to follow is even more random then that. There are two versions of the Ten Commandments, and in this version there's Commandment that most Christians break on a regular basis. Not some obscure Leviticus prohibition, no, one of the original Ten Commandments.

Christians break it, every week when they go Sunday Shopping.
Quote:
Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your manservant or maidservant, nor your animals, nor the alien within your gates.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 05-26-2006, 05:45 PM
Age Quod Agis Age Quod Agis is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeelB4Zod
But I do seem to recall that in the Bible, homosexuality might have been considered a greater sin than your average run of the mill sins (drunkenness, sloth, greed, etc.) because God saw it (the act, not the sinner) as an abomination.
I've always heard that the wages of all sin is death (i.e., you don't get eternal life). See Romans 6:23. In other words, all sins are equally bad. That includes homosexual relations, as well as not honoring your mother and father, being drunk, committing heterosexual adultery, or lusting after a woman (Matthew 5:27-28: "Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, 'Thou shalt not commit adultery:' But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.").

Also, Leviticus 18 does describe "l[ying] with a man as with a woman" as an abomination, but the entire chapter is an instruction not to follow the customs of the Canaanites, and it describes all of the customs as "abominations." The prohibited "abominations" include having sex with your neighbor's wife, having sex with an exhaustive list of your relatives, having sex with an animal, and having sex with a woman while she's menstruating.

In other words, homosexuality is not any worse than any other sin. I hope someone will come along with an authoritative description of what constitutes an "abomination," because I suspect it doesn't mean "super sin."
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-26-2006, 05:47 PM
Happy Clam Happy Clam is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Quote:
I dunno, but it seems to me homosexuality = no children = less worshipers= less money to the church = less power of the church = less power to the operators of the church.
I'm guessing the church and its operators don't like this much.
Actually, although this works in theory, I recall a thread where we decided that having a small but non-zero percentage of homosexuals in a society was a good thing, but it sucks up less resources (especially when that society has reached the bounds of its resources, as with humans in the current global climate, I'd have thought). For example, I seem to remember an experiment where groups of rats were placed in small apartments, and a much greater number of the rats exhibited homosexual behaviour than normal, because space for expansion was limited.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-26-2006, 05:49 PM
Happy Clam Happy Clam is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Quote:
I've always heard that the wages of all sin is death (i.e., you don't get eternal life). See Romans 6:23. In other words, all sins are equally bad. That includes homosexual relations, as well as not honoring your mother and father, being drunk, committing heterosexual adultery, or lusting after a woman (Matthew 5:27-28: "Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, 'Thou shalt not commit adultery:' But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.").

Also, Leviticus 18 does describe "l[ying] with a man as with a woman" as an abomination, but the entire chapter is an instruction not to follow the customs of the Canaanites, and it describes all of the customs as "abominations." The prohibited "abominations" include having sex with your neighbor's wife, having sex with an exhaustive list of your relatives, having sex with an animal, and having sex with a woman while she's menstruating.

In other words, homosexuality is not any worse than any other sin. I hope someone will come along with an authoritative description of what constitutes an "abomination," because I suspect it doesn't mean "super sin."
The bible is not the be all and end all of Christian dogma. St. Thomas Aquinas categorised various actions into "mortal sins" (ie. no heaven) and "venial sins" (um...no cookie?). Don;t know which category he put homosexuality into, though (I suspect it was the former, given that most sex is a mortal sin anyway.)
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-26-2006, 06:00 PM
HubZilla HubZilla is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Lev. 10:10 calls eating shellfish an abomination. So that shrimp scampi is just as bad as homosexuality.

I got this in an e-mail long ago, and loved it so much I saved it:



DEAR (FILL IN NAME OF LOCAL CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN MINISTER),

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding Godís law. I have learned a great deal from you, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them.

When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev. 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. How should I deal with this?

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as it suggests in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev. 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

Lev. 25:44 states that I may buy slaves from the nations that are around us. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans but not Canadians. Can you clarify?

I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Lev. 10:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I donít agree. Can you settle this?

Lev. 20:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.19:27. How should they die?

I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev.24:10-16) Couldnít we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev.20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that Godís word is eternal and unchanging.

- Source unknown
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05-26-2006, 06:23 PM
Age Quod Agis Age Quod Agis is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Clam
The bible is not the be all and end all of Christian dogma. St. Thomas Aquinas categorised various actions into "mortal sins" (ie. no heaven) and "venial sins" (um...no cookie?).
Actually, the Bible is the "be all and end all of Christian dogma." At least according to the Bible. See Deut. 4:2 ("You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take anything from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you."); Prov. 30:6 (Do not add to His words, Lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar."); Rev. 22:18-19 ("For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."); Mark 7:7-10 ("And in vain they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.' "For laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men--the washing of pitchers and cups, and many other such things you do." And He said to them, "All too well you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition.").

At least since the Protestant Reformation, most Christians have been making up their own minds what the Bible means based on what the Bible says. What Thomas Aquinas said about the Bible is an interesting meditation, but it's not something that Christians must follow. In other words, it's not Christian dogma. Similarly, although Catholics are supposedly bound by the Pope's Biblican interpretation, most Catholics I know tend to make up their own minds based on their reading of the Bible.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05-26-2006, 06:24 PM
Happy Clam Happy Clam is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Alright, you win. I should't have used the word "dogma". Would "teaching" be ok? Or "thought"? I specifically chose Aquinas because he was pre-Reformation, and you had to go and spoil my argument .
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 05-26-2006, 06:33 PM
Maastricht Maastricht is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Dutch in the Netherlands
Posts: 8,021
HubZilla, here's your source for that " Letter do Dr. Laura".
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 05-26-2006, 06:33 PM
Maastricht Maastricht is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Dutch in the Netherlands
Posts: 8,021
HubZilla, here's your source for that " Letter to Dr. Laura".
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 05-26-2006, 06:52 PM
The Flying Dutchman The Flying Dutchman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maastricht
Christians break it, every week when they go Sunday Shopping.
Not true. The Sabbath starts Friday night and basically covers Saturday.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 05-26-2006, 06:52 PM
Age Quod Agis Age Quod Agis is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Trihs
You'll note that Christ said nothing on the subject ( and some think Jesus was gay himself, in fact ). He made his position clear on lots of things; if homosexuality was so earthshaking an evil, he'd have mentioned it.
Although Jesus never formally said "Homosexuality is still bad," there are prohibitions against homosexuality in the New Testament (See, e.g., 1 Timothy 1:9-11 (which equally condemns lying); 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (which equally condemns drunkeness)).

Jesus also talks about marriage in terms of a man and a woman:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark 10
The Pharisees approached and asked, "Is it lawful for a husband to divorce his wife?" They were testing him. He said to them in reply, "What did Moses command you?" They replied, "Moses permitted him to write a bill of divorce and dismiss her." But Jesus told them, "Because of the hardness of your hearts he wrote you this commandment. But from the beginning of creation, 'God made them male and female. For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother (and be joined to his wife), and the two shall become one flesh.' So they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, no human being must separate."
And homosexuality was certainly prohibited under the law of the Old Testament, and Jesus said this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew 5:17-21
"Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say to you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven."
Some people think Jesus was saying that all of the laws in the Old Testament still apply. (Note -- I don't agree with this interpretation.)
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 05-26-2006, 06:56 PM
Age Quod Agis Age Quod Agis is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Clam
Alright, you win. I should't have used the word "dogma". Would "teaching" be ok? Or "thought"? I specifically chose Aquinas because he was pre-Reformation, and you had to go and spoil my argument .
I think "teaching" or "thought" would be fine, so long as we agree that Christians are free to believe whatever they want to believe, and just because Aquinas or CS Lewis or the Pope say something about God's will or law mean they speak for all Christianity, or that they're correct.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 05-26-2006, 07:14 PM
Age Quod Agis Age Quod Agis is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad/Igor
An interesting re-wording of the question would be: Why do we [Christians] pay an inordinate amount of attention to 10 Levitical laws and ignore the other 600? What makes those more important (even if they don't specifically mention homosexuality) than the other laws?
I think the answer is that they're not more important. Or at least they shouldn't be.

First of all, as I said above, homosexuality is condemned in more places than just one chapter in Leviticus.

Second, one possible reason that Levitical laws do not apply to Christians anymore is that Levitical laws applied under the Old Covenant between man and God. Jesus came and established a New Covenant, which superseded the laws of the Old Covenant. Here's Wikipedia on the subject, and here's Hebrews 8 and 9.

As I said above, some people think Jesus's new laws incorporated all of the old laws. And some people don't believe in the New Covenant theory. So there's certainly some disagreement about this.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 05-26-2006, 07:22 PM
Ike Witt Ike Witt is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Lost in the mists of time
Posts: 11,430
I've always thought that, based on todays idealogues, that 'thou shall not be gay' was the 12th commandment. "Thou shall not abort" must be the 11th.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 05-26-2006, 07:43 PM
Freudian_Slip Freudian_Slip is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Age Quod Agis
I hope someone will come along with an authoritative description of what constitutes an "abomination," because I suspect it doesn't mean "super sin."
There's a book called "What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality" by Daniel Helminiak, Ph.D.

Linky linky



There's a whole chapter entitled "The Abomination of Leviticus" - he starts off to say that "homogenital sex meant to be like the Gentiles, to identify with the non-Jews." (p45) It was the meaning behind having homosexual sex, not the sex act itself, that was the problem for members of the Jewish faith as it was against the Holiness Code of Leviticus.

According to the author, abomination is another word for "unclean" as per his interpretation of Lev 20:25-26. "The early Israelites thought it [homogenital sex] was dirty. It was prohibited not because it was wrong in itself but because it offended sensitivities ... Homogenitality made a man like a Canaanite. And to the Israelites, God's chosen people, that was unacceptable." (p51-2)

The book is pretty fascinating, for those interested in the topic. ;j
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 05-26-2006, 08:16 PM
bagkitty bagkitty is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
But an eleventh commandment would mean the tablets wouldn't be symmetrical anymore

:wally
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 05-26-2006, 09:14 PM
Least Original User Name Ever Least Original User Name Ever is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Trihs
I've heard it's a theory being bounced around mostly in Europe, based on some line about Jesus having a "special love" for one of the Apostles; John, I think. I don't know the details.

A bunch of years ago in high school, we were supposed to find a website for a history class pertaining to one of the Revolutionaries in America. I picked Alexander Hamilton. The first thing that came up after the search was a site that claimed he was gay and that his partner was George Washington. Apparently, George's marriage to Martha was one of convenience. I printed it up on pink paper and handed it in.

On the same paper was a link to Jesus, who they claimed was gay and had some evidence. I believe I clicked on it, but I don't recall specifics.

Long story short, that's out there on the internets, if you wanna look fer it.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 05-26-2006, 09:16 PM
GIGObuster GIGObuster is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Least Original User Name Ever
A bunch of years ago in high school, we were supposed to find a website for a history class pertaining to one of the Revolutionaries in America. I picked Alexander Hamilton. The first thing that came up after the search was a site that claimed he was gay and that his partner was George Washington. Apparently, George's marriage to Martha was one of convenience. I printed it up on pink paper and handed it in.

On the same paper was a link to Jesus, who they claimed was gay and had some evidence. I believe I clicked on it, but I don't recall specifics.

Long story short, that's out there on the internets, if you wanna look fer it.
Or check post #8 in this thread...
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 05-26-2006, 09:17 PM
Least Original User Name Ever Least Original User Name Ever is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by bagkitty
But an eleventh commandment would mean the tablets wouldn't be symmetrical anymore

:wally

It was the third one on the third tablet, the one that Mel Brooks dropped.

Don't be a Dick.

Everyone should NOT love Raymond.

No sleeping with people of your gender.

Wear white after Labor Day.

Draw Happy Trees.

and....

Fuck tha Police.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 05-26-2006, 09:24 PM
Tripwire Tripwire is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Age Quod Agis
Actually, the Bible is the "be all and end all of Christian dogma." At least according to the Bible. See Deut. 4:2 ("You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take anything from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.");
Wow, now that's a neat trick. This passage, written long before the entire NT, is referring to the Bible. And Christians, who not only mistranslate and mangle Jewish scriptures as well as explicitly NOT following this command (since they have definately not kept the commandments there referred to, and have in fact played cafateria-style games with which to follow) are somehow in a position to lecture us on this?

Quote:
Prov. 30:6 (Do not add to His words, Lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar.");
So, wait: the NT is, what again, according to this passage which supposedly you think refers to all of Scripture?

Quote:
Rev. 22:18-19 ("For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.");
So this applies to the entire Bible, how, again?

Quote:
At least since the Protestant Reformation, most Christians have been making up their own minds what the Bible means based on what the Bible says.
Which unfortunately happens to be utterly incoherent. The idea that the Bible is the sole authority on what Christianity is all about is an idea that's less than 500 years old. Before then, everyone understood that scriptures could only really be understood in light of the traditions and other teachings passed down and with the scriptures. Heck, Jews and Catholics still understand that. And it makes a heck of a lot more sense than the "Bible-only" heresy. For instance, many Protestants reject intercessory prayer because it's not in the Bible. Well, guess what: it existed long BEFORE the Bible: a practice of the early church. Why does it make sense to dump something that was good enough for the early church in favor of a collection of texts put together 400 years later that even THEN wasn't meant to be the be-all and end-all of things, just what was considered to be the finest and most reliable and important documents?
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 05-26-2006, 09:25 PM
GIGObuster GIGObuster is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Least Original User Name Ever
It was the third one on the third tablet, the one that Mel Brooks dropped.

Don't be a Dick.

Everyone should NOT love Raymond.

No sleeping with people of your gender.

Wear white after Labor Day.

Draw Happy Trees.

and....

Fuck tha Police.
I liked the list by Judith Hayes:

http://www.valleyskeptic.com/tencom_1.htm

My favorite:

Quote:
7. Thou shalt not pick all the cashews out of the mixed nuts.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 05-26-2006, 09:43 PM
Least Original User Name Ever Least Original User Name Ever is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
This is true. There's only a finite amount of cashews in the mixed nuts, people. Of course you like the cashews...I like em mah-self. Don't go bogarting them and keeping all the cashewy goodness to yourself.

This falls under "Don't be a Dick", as far as I'm concerned. This is just simply a shade of Dickery.

If you've seen Team America, then you know what Dicks are capable of.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 05-26-2006, 10:09 PM
Diogenes the Cynic Diogenes the Cynic is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 58,797
Quote:
Originally Posted by Age Quod Agis
Actually, the Bible is the "be all and end all of Christian dogma." At least according to the Bible. See Deut. 4:2 ("You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take anything from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you."); Prov. 30:6 (Do not add to His words, Lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar.")
Ironic that Christians ignored these admonitions and added a whole bunch of new scripture.
Quote:
Rev. 22:18-19 ("For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.")
This passage applies only to the Book of Revelation itself. The New Testament didn't even exist yet and the author had no idea that his apocalypse was ever going to be Canonized as part of anyone's Bible.
Quote:
.Although Jesus never formally said "Homosexuality is still bad," there are prohibitions against homosexuality in the New Testament (See, e.g., 1 Timothy 1:9-11 (which equally condemns lying); 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (which equally condemns drunkeness)).
These passages do not condemn homosexuality. The Greek in these passages is typically mistranslated in English. Nothing in the NT condemns homsexuality.
Quote:
Jesus also talks about marriage in terms of a man and a woman
He doesn't explicitly say it has to be a man and a woman and comments on marriage really have nothing to do with homosexuality anyway.
Quote:
And homosexuality was certainly prohibited under the law of the Old Testament, and Jesus said this:Some people think Jesus was saying that all of the laws in the Old Testament still apply. (Note -- I don't agree with this interpretation.)
It's not so certain that the Hebrew Bible condemns homosexuality (as opposed to homesxual acts in the context of cultic practices) and Jesus supposedly repealed all the Levitical laws anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 05-26-2006, 10:25 PM
jayjay jayjay is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
The Roman Catholic Church considers homosexual activity to be subsumed under the commandment against adultery, as it considers all fornication (including masturbation).
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 05-26-2006, 10:39 PM
bup bup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
It is the ten commandments - "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his ass..."
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 05-26-2006, 10:47 PM
BrainGlutton BrainGlutton is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeelB4Zod
I think it's interesting considering that homosexuality was a topic that was covered and dutifully condemned in the Bible, why wasn't homosexuality specifically forbidden in the 10 Commandments?
Ermm . . . Because it's just too embarrassing to be mentioned in the Decalogue? Sure it's forbidden, but discreetly buried among the details, like building your roof with a parapet and not mixing wool with cotton.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 05-26-2006, 11:18 PM
GIGObuster GIGObuster is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by bup
It is the ten commandments - "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his ass..."
It is worse than that.

The complete 10th commandment:

"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbor's."

Notice the white wash? While new translations go to pains to make sound innocuous, those servants there were slaves.

I bring that up because in the commandments here we have an item that is considered now a worse sin than coveting: keeping other human beings in bondage, and I'm not talking about the kinky kind.

Whereas they like it or not, society changes, and religions changed with no problems in the far past because virtually everything was an oral tradition, unfortunately these days we have writing that has the pesky habit of showing how inadequate is to apply rules of the past in the world of the present.

Attempting to enforce unfair old rules, that before would have been changed with little fuss to make religion more in tune with society, is what IMHO will eventually end the old time religions.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 05-26-2006, 11:19 PM
BrainGlutton BrainGlutton is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by bup
It is the ten commandments - "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his ass..."
OTOH, we have, "Thy rod and Thy staff, they comfort me!"
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 05-26-2006, 11:30 PM
Marley23 Marley23 is offline
I Am the One Who Bans
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 77,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Clam
Of course, God destroys Sodom and Gomorrah
Not everybody believes that was about homosexuality.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 05-27-2006, 03:43 AM
Maastricht Maastricht is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Dutch in the Netherlands
Posts: 8,021
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flying Dutchman
Not true. The Sabbath starts Friday night and basically covers Saturday.
Hence all the Christian churchgoing on Fridaynight and Saturday?

First of all, our " week" with Mondays, Fridays etc isn't in the bible at all. There is just talk of "resting on the seventh day" . The names of the days of our week are even derived from the Norse gods Thor and Freya !

Secondly, what is your point? You are correct, tradionally Jewish Sabbath does start on Friday. But Christians, in general, have picked Sunday as their seventh day of rest. Probably to set themselves apart form Judaism in the first place. Hence all the Churchgoing on Sunday, you know. Actually, untill thirty years ago, many Christians in the USA fought like lions to keep the Sabbath work-free. There were protest agains musicians working on Sunday in bars and concerts in much the same way as there are now Christians protesting against gay marriage and abortion.
Take for instance this link that describes "The first fifty years of Washington"
Quote:
For several years after the seat of government was fixed at Washington, there were but two small churches. The roman-catholic chapel in F. street, then a little frame building, and the Episcopalian church at the foot of Capitol-hill; both, very small and mean frame buildings. Now, in 1837 there are 22 churches of brick or stone. Sunday used to be the universal day for visits and entertainments. Only a few, very few of the gayest citizens now, either pay or receive visits. There was one sermon delivered by Mr. Breckenridge at the commencement of the war that was deemed quite prophetic--whether inspired or not, his predictions were certainly and accurately fulfilled. This pious and reverend preacher, made up in zeal and fidelity, what he lacked in natural talents or acquired knowledge, and in the plainest and boldest language of reprehension addressed the members of Congress and officers of government present on that occasion. The subject of his discourse was the observance of the Sabbath. After enlarging on its prescribed duties, he vehemently declaimed on the neglect of those duties, particularly by the higher classes and in this city, more especially by persons connected with the government, tie unshrinkingly taxed those then listening to him, with a desecration of this holy day, by their devoting it to amusement--to visiting and parties, emphatically condemning the dinner-parties given at the white-house, then addressing himself to the members of Congress, accused them of violating the day, by laws they had made, particularly the carrying the mail on the sabbath; he ennumerated the men and horses employed for this purpose.
Other countries still honor the Sabbath and close their stores on Sunday. As I posted in the linked thread
Quote:
In the Netherlands the Christian Party believes it is a fundamental fight, one that identifies them as Christians, to prevent Sunday Shopping. That's right, in the Netherlands all stores are closed on Sunday, (barring fewer then a dozen Shopping Sundays a year in the bigger cities). The Christian parties want to keep it that way, on the grounds, quite rightly in their line of reasoning, that one of the Ten Commandments orders us to "Honour The Sabbath." (The non-Christian parties agree, but for other reasons)

This in sharp contrast with the USA, where Sunday is THE day for shopping. (I think the explanation for this is that Sunday shopping is vital to the USA economic system; when you have people working at all hours, they have to be able to shop at all hours (or the other way around, I'm not sure ).
But still, it has always struck me as odd that Christian fundies in the USA don't even think twice about breaking one of the ten Commandments but go berserk when it comes to inconclusively condemned things like homosexuality.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 05-27-2006, 03:49 AM
Maastricht Maastricht is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Dutch in the Netherlands
Posts: 8,021
Oops: I didn't include my two links: Link to the Libray of Congress for the historical bit;
Link to the threadwith my post about no Sunday shopping in the Netherlands
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 05-27-2006, 06:45 AM
Happy Clam Happy Clam is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Some people think Jesus was saying that all of the laws in the Old Testament still apply. (Note -- I don't agree with this interpretation.)[/QUOTE]

I would have been suprised by this, since doesn't Jesus explicitly dissolve dietary requirements?
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 05-27-2006, 06:45 AM
Uzi Uzi is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Hong Kong and Africa
Posts: 4,242
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeelB4Zod
If homosexuality is so sinful, why isn't its prohibition one of the 10 Commandments?
Because back in those days they only had ONE SIZED FONT and nothing more could be fitted onto a couple of stones light enough for Moses to carry down the mountain.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 05-27-2006, 08:21 AM
FriarTed FriarTed is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: IN USA
Posts: 12,888
To respond to the OP- a lot of BIble-believing Jews & Christians consider the anti-Adultery commandment to include all forbidden sexual acts. Heck, bestiality & pedophilia & rape don't make the Big Ten either. (Necessary note- No, I am not equating those with homosexuality.)

And in spite of Diogenes' assertion that the NT doesn't even speak to the subject-
the consensus of even mainstream-to-liberal Christian churches still does not favor gay sex, tho I would not be surprised to see that change in a decade.
Then again, I've been expecting the Great Protestant Schism since the mid-80s.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 05-27-2006, 09:09 AM
The Flying Dutchman The Flying Dutchman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maastricht
Hence all the Christian churchgoing on Fridaynight and Saturday?
So what? Your assumption that churchgoing is an example of sabbath observance as mandated in the 10 commandments has no basis either from the decalogue or the entire Christian bible.
Quote:
First of all, our " week" with Mondays, Fridays etc isn't in the bible at all. There is just talk of "resting on the seventh day" . The names of the days of our week are even derived from the Norse gods Thor and Freya !
Oh please. The Norse didn't invent the seven day week. Translate Sunday as the first day of the week and Saturday as the seventh day. The distinction is quite relevant for example in this passage
Quote:
1After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb.
The first day of the week appears to be quite significant following this event as the recorded gathering of a Christian assembly takes place on this day
Quote:
7On the first day of the week we came together to break bread. Paul spoke to the people and, because he intended to leave the next day, kept on talking until midnight.
However, In researching for cites in my response to you, a European, I, a North American, uncovered a hitherto unknown (to me) fact regarding these to two days that provide some irrelevancy to our argument. From Wikipedia
Quote:
In many countries, including most of Europe, Asia, and South America (except Brazil), Sunday is held to be the last day of the week. In others, including the United States, Canada, and in parts of Africa it is seen as the first day, a traditional view derived from ancient Jews, Egyptians and the Holy Roman Empire. ISO 8601 defines Monday as the first day of the week, making Sunday the seventh.
In light of this new information I can only conclude that my original rebuttal regarding on which day the sabbath of the ten commandments falls on does not apply to you and a good part of the rest of the world.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 05-27-2006, 09:28 AM
BrainGlutton BrainGlutton is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Trihs
I've heard it's a theory being bounced around mostly in Europe, based on some line about Jesus having a "special love" for one of the Apostles; John, I think. I don't know the details.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beloved_disciple

Does make you stop and think. This was Jesus. Presumably he loved everybody -- all his disciples, all his followers, all his enemies, and all indifferent persons. Why single out one disciple as the one "whom Jesus loved" unless they had a special relationship?
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 05-27-2006, 04:19 PM
DocCathode DocCathode is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Jew Checking In

The Ten Commandments are binding only to Jews. But, all humanity is bound by the 7 laws of Noah. One of those laws is 'No sexual immorality'. The seven are deliberately vague as many laws are meant to be implied by them.

Re Soddom And Gommorah

Any Jewish scholar will tell you two things. First, they will quote Leviticus and say that homosexuality is an abomination. Second, they will tell you the two cities were destroyed because the people there were without compassion. Worshipping idols, and everything else would have been overlooked if they had shown compassion to the stranger.

Friar Ted is correct that many Jews define adultery as 'sex with anybody who is not your spouse.'. Since rabbis do not marry two men or two women, homosexual sex is adultery by this definition.

Re the Sabbath

Any Jew will tell you that saturday is the Sabbath. I only post on saturdays due to a special arrangement with G-d, and because I am Jew Lite (Now with almonds!)
__________________
Nothing is impossible if you can imagine it. That's the wonder of being a scientist!
Prof Hubert Farnsworth, Futurama
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 05-27-2006, 04:31 PM
jayjay jayjay is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocCathode
Friar Ted is correct that many Jews define adultery as 'sex with anybody who is not your spouse.'. Since rabbis do not marry two men or two women, homosexual sex is adultery by this definition.
I would never presume to try to tell you anything about Judaism as if I knew it better than you, Doc, but doesn't Reconstructionist Judaism wholeheartedly approve religiously-sanctioned same-sex marriage, and doesn't Reform Judaism, while not firmly coming down on the side of performing same, definitely champions civil same-sex marriage? Do neither of these movements have rabbis as their religious leaders? (That's not a rhetorical gotcha question, but a genuine one...I have no idea if my assumptions that they do are true or not)
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 05-27-2006, 04:39 PM
BrainGlutton BrainGlutton is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayjay
I would never presume to try to tell you anything about Judaism as if I knew it better than you, Doc, but doesn't Reconstructionist Judaism wholeheartedly approve religiously-sanctioned same-sex marriage . . .
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've heard "Reconstructionist" (or maybe it was "Revisionist") Judaism is kind of a New-Agey movement.

"Like, we would eat pork, man, but we're vegetarians!"
Reply With Quote
Reply



Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright © 2013 Sun-Times Media, LLC.