Mangetout: No doubt because someone she’s decided to place her trust in tells her that’s the right one. I daresay that she’s done about as much research into that person’s quals as she has into what the LDS teach. :sigh:
I don’t know if I can explain it. I’ve always believed that way as long as I can remember. I grew up in church, was born again at about 27. I’ve read the Bible and done a lot of reading of books by Christian authors. It just has the ring of truth to my soul that the Bible is the word of God and is literal and reliable. It’s deep in my heart and soul. I respect your right to disagree and apologize that I’m unable to explain satisfactorily.
I don’t want to presume anything Monty; If H4E has experienced what she believes to be a direct revelation from God regarding the inerrancy of scripture or the correct way to treat homosexuals then I don’t think there would be much we can do about it, but if it’s anything like what happened to me it is something like:
[ul][li]Encounters with theists (of some variety)[/li][li]Encounters with (what appears to be) God[/li][li]More encounters with theists, who kindly explain how experiences with (what appears to be) God are entirely consistent with their views[/li][li]Acceptance of their views[/li][li]Deep intellectual difficulty in rejecting well-established contrary views (such as biological evolution, in my case)[/li][li]Much reinforcement of views, encouragement not to look elsewhere for answers[/li][li]Nagging doubts[/ul]Which, in my own case was later followed by:[/li][ul][li]More encounters with (what appears to be) God[/li][li]Encounters with different theists, who argue that belief in God does not necessarily entail literal view of scriptures or rejection of that which can be demonstrated scientifically[/li][li]Review of personal encounters with (what appears to be) God[/li][li]Surprised discovery that none of reviewed encounters actually supported a literal view of scripture (in fact most of them were to do with day-to day living and personal interaction)[/li][li]Acceptance that God is revealed in scripture, but that scripture is not God[/li][li]Profound feeling of peace[/ul][/li]For this reason, I feel it’s quite important that we establish exactly why H4E feels so strongly that a rigid, literal view of scripture is the right one.
His4ever, allow me to add my voice to those asking how you can cite Leviticus as binding doctrine on homosexual conduct while not following the other laws laid down in that book. I’m not saying the positions can’t be reconciled, but to not even attempt to reconcile them strikes me as rather lazy faith.
Thanks for replying and I really don’t mean to be disrespectful, but I believe that it’s not possible to accept things like Young-Earth Creation and the Global Biblical flood as literal unless you deliberately choose to ignore an enormous heap of evidence and rational argument, not to mention common sense.
Although I suspect it feels this way to you right now, I don’t believe many members (if any at all) here on the board seek to destroy your faith, however I think it’s fair to say that many would consider it misplaced if the object of your faith is the Bible, rather than the God that is revealed in it.
I do believe that if you are prepared to open your eyes and ears and mind, then you may find that your heart and soul find new depths of wonder and majesty; it’s possible to worship and honour God with your mind.
I hope this doesn’t come across as condescending or insulting; if it helps, all I am really describing is my own journey thus far.
Once again, returning to the question I asked over two years ago, of which OT commandments still apply to Christians and which don’t?
The question was re-asked by Soup_du_jour’s thread Why do many Fundies go after homosexuals, but not after people who shave?.
What’s your answer, His4ever?
Zev Steinhardt
As far as all the questions about why accept the prohibitions against homosexual behavior in Leviticus and not the commandments to keep kosher, haven’t we done that already?
The distinction is between moral law, and ceremonial law. Jesus came to fulfill both, but the moral law is still binding.
Thus Gentiles don’t have to keep kosher, but do have to obey the commandments against murder and adultery.
And one guideline as to how to tell which commandment is moral and which is ceremonial is whether or not it is ratified in the New Testament. Thus Peter’s vision of the animals on the sheet (and the Gospel mention of how Jesus “declared all foods clean”) mean that Gentile Christians can eat pork and shellfish, but bearing false witness or stealing are still forbidden.
Unfortunately, this means that the anti-gay passages in Romans, Corinthians, and Revelation can be cited as evidence that the law against homosexual behavior is moral, not ceremonial.
Or else we bog down rather fast in “well, that’s how you interpret Scripture. Here’s how I interpret it.”
Regards,
Shodan
[tiny interruption]
His4ever, could you please email me
here when you get a chance? I have a question I’d like to ask you in private and your email address is not listed in your profile.
Thanks.
[sorry for the interruption]
Carry on…
Thanks for explaining it better than I can Shodan and for showing respect for my beliefs.
AAAAH respect for others beliefs. What a wonderful thing.
Wish Mr. Chick and his ilk would dish that at out as well as demand it for themselves. HIS4EVER you may not notice the irony of this but I’m sure you feel the sting of what it feels like when someone tells you your belief is Wrong and perhaps Evil.
Maybe you may take offense if some one follows it up with a “You’re going to burn in hell if you don’t change,” and you should. Now take that in absorb it and think about how others feel when you say their religion or belief system is wrong.
You may believe you are right and God supports you, but they believe the same about their beliefs. You may believe they are deceived, but guess what they think that about you. You claim you have proof, others have proof of their beliefs. Who is right? You have no more idea than I do, you just have the illusion that you are absolutely correct and right.
To paraphrase a quote “A fool believes he knows the universe, a wise man accepts the knowledge that he knows nothing.”
Maybe you should learn the wonderful doctrine of acceptence.
I am so very glad I’m not Christian. Thank you for reaffirming that once again. Cheers!
Esprix
OK, I’m not going to pick on His4Ever; I just want to ask some questions.
Why do fundamentalists call gay people “anti-family”?
Why do fundamentalists support legal discrimination that would deny gay people employment or a place to live?
Why do fundamentalists oppose legal recognition of same-sex unions?
Do you think it is right for conservative Christians to use the law to impose their religious beliefs on other people and deny them the same protections you enjoy?
Relying on Shodan to come up with your answer for you, His4ever? You’re not getting away that easy! 
Shodan says that the distinction in whilch Old Testament laws to keep and which to ignore is whether it’s “ceremonial” (ignore) or “moral” (keep). Unfortunately, in a lot of cases, that distinction is far from clear.
For instance (cribbing from Soup-du-jour’s OP in the thread linked by zev_steinhardt), Deuteronomy says you’ve got to chop off a woman’s hand if she grabs her husband by the balls to break up a fight between him and another man. Since I don’t hear very many fundamentalists talking about chopping off women’s hands, I’m assuming this falls into the “ceremonial” category. But why? It’s just about behavior, right? Where’s the ceremony?
And how about Deuteronomy’s ban on a man wearing women’s clothing or a woman wearing man’s clothing, since God detests cross-dressers? If you’ve worn pants lately, I guess you think that’s just a superceded ceremonial thing too, right? But if God doesn’t hate girls who wear men’s clothes any longer, why does he detest a man who “lies with a man as one lies with a woman”?
And finally, if your criterion is whether the rule is ratified in the New Testament, aren’t there a fair number of Old Testament rules that you think are binding even though they aren’t addressed in the New Testament? And on a related note, are there any New Testament injunctions that are safe to ignore? For instance, I have to say that, by hanging out with a bunch of infidels and heretics like us, you seem to be disobeying Romans 16:17-18:
See, it’s fun to disobey the Bible!
“Thanks for explaining it better than I can Shodan and for showing respect for my beliefs.”
Better than you can … well, that’s certainly true, given that up to this point you hadn’t really tried to explain it at all:) At least not from what I’ve read in this thread (every post, IIRC).
Now, can you give us a Bible verse or two to support your (benefit of the doubt, even though the doubt is pretty much confirmed at this point) belief?
And if those of us who are not His4ever could refrain from giving her the answer, that would be most lovely:)
So it seems that calling my faith a cult is showing respect for another’s belief, hey, H4E? :rolleyes:
I do believe The Big Guy railed against hypocrites.
So far you’re batting a thou.
So it seems that calling my faith a cult is showing respect for another’s belief, hey, H4E? :rolleyes:
I do believe The Big Guy railed against hypocrites.
So far you’re batting a thou.
gobear: I am one fundie who does none of those things you mentioned.
Its called separation of religion and politics.
Hey, can I ask people to take it a bit easier on His4ever?
(I certainly don’t mean to single out you, Monty, especially since I completely understand the offense to your faith, as well as that of the Catholic posters to the thread.)
Like many, many people of faith, His4ever believes that a whole lot of other people of faith are misguided, deceived, cultists, tools of the devil, whatever. That shouldn’t come as any great surprise in a religious debate, especially with a self-described fundamentalist. But it seems to me that this is going to be a lot more productive discussion if we shrug off the affronts to our beliefs (or non-beliefs, in my case 
).
If somebody makes an incorrect assumption or assertion, correct ‘em. But the more snippy this becomes, the less anybody is going to learn about the others’ beliefs.
Damn, wrong smilie.
).
As Shodan said there’s a difference between ceremonial and moral law. Moral behavior is different than having to worry about fixing food a certain way or washing pots and cups a certain way, etc. Homosexuality is addressed in both old and new testaments.
Romans chapter 1 addresses it and also 1 Corinthians 6. I’d like to write some scripture out and ask what you think about it.
1 Corinthians 6:9-11 - Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind (homosexuals *see note below), nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you (some used to be homsexuals evidently, let’s see what it says next): but ye are washed (evidently meaning that before, they were dirty), but ye are sanctified (evidently they weren’t before they came to Christ), but ye are justified (evidently now, but now before) in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
*note - I went to Crosswalk.com and used their Bible study tools to look up the same verses in a few other versions and they either translate the words “abusers of themselves with mankind” to sodomites or homosexuals.
You are free to interpret these as you like, of course, but to me it clearly is saying those who live the lifestyles in these verses won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Then it proceeds to say that they used to be like that but are now washed, sanctified, etc, because of their faith in Christ. They didn’t continue in adultery, idolatry, homosexuality, etc. I don’t know how else to explain it other than what I’ve said. Some old testament things we aren’t under any more, but morality we are. And homosexuality is addressed in both testaments. When you constantly ask me why I don’t keep all the old testament laws, it just seems (to me anyway) that you’re trying to get around the issue of what it says about homosexuality. If you can ask me something I don’t know how to answer or mess me up then you don’t have to consider the possibility that this behaviour may, indeed, be wrong and maybe, just maybe the Bible means just what it says about it. May I ask you how you pick and choose what you believe is valid and isn’t anymore? Do you believe that God is obligated to change what He considers is right and wrong to suit us? I believe that God isn’t answerable to us, we’re answerable to Him. I hope this post doesn’t get me another string of name calling and so many questions that my head will spin. I’ve already answered the best I can with what I know the Bible to say on this issue.