Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
The John Byrne Forum
Byrne Robotics > The John Byrne Forum Page of 2 Next >>
Topic: Has He Not Read the Book? Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
John Byrne
Avatar
Grumpy Old Guy

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132135
Posted: 25 January 2023 at 2:52pm | IP Logged | 1 post reply

Pope says Homosexuality Not a Crime

Guess I missed the update that expunges Leviticus 20:13.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 15729
Posted: 25 January 2023 at 4:10pm | IP Logged | 2 post reply

Doesn't the church believe there was an update around the year zero?
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Grumpy Old Guy

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132135
Posted: 25 January 2023 at 4:26pm | IP Logged | 3 post reply

Jesus said he came to fulfill the Law, not to change it.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Andrew Bitner
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 June 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 7467
Posted: 25 January 2023 at 5:15pm | IP Logged | 4 post reply

I think Pope Francis is reading the tea leaves with respect to Catholicism's declining flock and figures that cutting loose Leviticus (which IIRC is about the only place homosexuality is explicitly condemned) is a worthwhile trade-off.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Michael Penn
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 April 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 12406
Posted: 25 January 2023 at 8:18pm | IP Logged | 5 post reply

Romans 1:26-27
For this reason God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error.

1 Corinthians 6:9–10
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.


(No "revilers" either? Oh well!)


Back to Top profile | search
 
Jim Petersman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 26 June 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 624
Posted: 26 January 2023 at 1:18am | IP Logged | 6 post reply

Religious Leader speaking on legal matters for which he has no authority: "It's not a crime."

Religious Leader speaking on religious matters for which some believe he has authority: "It is a sin."

Me: "Anyone running an organization that is known to abuse children and *protect the abusers* should STFU.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Matt Reed
Byrne Robotics Security
Avatar
Robotmod

Joined: 16 April 2004
Posts: 35693
Posted: 26 January 2023 at 5:19am | IP Logged | 7 post reply

Sodom and Gomorrah would put the lie to rest re: Leviticus being the only instance in which homosexuality is condemned. I know there are more modern readings of it, but given that the word “sodomy” is derived from the biblical, historical text I find it hard to believe that it’s true that there is just a single instance mentioned in the Bible. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
ron bailey
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 October 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 910
Posted: 26 January 2023 at 5:56am | IP Logged | 8 post reply

His more complete quote is, 'homosexuality is not a crime but is a sin".
Back to Top profile | search
 
Jason Scott
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 06 August 2012
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1164
Posted: 26 January 2023 at 7:43am | IP Logged | 9 post reply

"nor men who practice homosexuality"
------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------

But not women? LOL!
Back to Top profile | search
 
Michael Penn
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 April 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 12406
Posted: 26 January 2023 at 12:15pm | IP Logged | 10 post reply

Maybe when the men are done practicing and get really expert at homosexuality, they're fine too?



Back to Top profile | search
 
Michael Roberts
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 14812
Posted: 26 January 2023 at 12:51pm | IP Logged | 11 post reply

The Catholic Church has many, many issues, but Biblical fundamentalism isn't one of them. Taking the words in the Bible literally with no context is more an Evangelical thing.

Christian apologists and Christian critics can both be guilty of quoting the Bible to argue a point while ignoring the cultural, historical, and linguistic contexts of the original text.

Like if I tried to argue that Fred Flintstone and Barney Rubble are clearly lovers because according to the Flintstones theme song, when you are with the Flintstones, "we'll have a gay old time", that would be ridiculous because it ignores that the word "gay" has multiple meanings and that in a themes song for a 60s cartoon, it would be very unlikely that they they are using "gay" to mean homosexual. But that's sort of what's happening when people apply a modern context to the English translation of books written in Hebrew and Greek by ancient Hebrew authors.

For some dry reading of the multiple theories in critical scholarship about the "clobber passages" in Leviticus, here you go:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/361182281_Don%27t_D o_What_to_Whom_A_Survey_of_Historical-Critical_Scholarship_o n_Leviticus_1822_and_2013_Currents_in_Biblical_Research_203_ 2022_203-233_UNCORRECTED_PRE-PRINT

My takeaway is that 1) Leviticus cannot condemn homosexuality (as an identity), because homosexuality as an identity is a modern thing that the author of Leviticus would have no context for; 2) Leviticus is probably condemning a specific homosexual act, not homosexuality in general; and 3) why that act is condemned and whether that prohibition is applicable to modern non-Israelites, nobody knows.


Back to Top profile | search
 
Rebecca Jansen
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 February 2018
Location: Canada
Posts: 4410
Posted: 26 January 2023 at 7:38pm | IP Logged | 12 post reply

And cutting down the fig tree that doesn't bear fruit could be read as: if you don't produce offspring you too should be put to the axe. Maybe now when gay couples are 'allowed' to have children and/or adopt there's more in it for the church... saved souls/future parishioners for the collection plate, while requiring celibacy of priests and nuns so their worldly goods go to the church.

All I can say is there is no Pope, or even really big hats, mentioned in the collection of writings we call 'The Bible' (aka thee book) that I've seen. Also nothing about anyone covering faces in the Qur-an.
Back to Top profile | search | www
 

Page of 2 Next >>
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login