Says the Tubby Riefenstahl:
"There is nowhere in the four Gospels where Jesus uses the word 'homosexual.' The right wing has appropriated this guy ... and they have used him to attack gays and lesbians, when he never said a single word against people who are homosexual. Anyone who professes to be a Christian and does that is certainly not following the teachings of Jesus Christ."
Jesus says:
It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law. --Luke 16:17
The Law says:
Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable. --Leviticus 18:22
Jesus upholds the law-->true
The law declares homosexuality to be a sin-->true
Jesus therefore says that homosexuality is a sin-->true
Case closed.
While I agree with your point, I don't think you should mention Moore and Riefenstahl in the same breath. She was a genius; Moore is definitely not. Even Nazis deserve credit where credit is due. ;)
While I understand where you are coming from and know you're joking, I disagree with the statements like "calling feminists feminazis is an insult to nazis." I think that the differences are subjective and immaterial to the point that they are all cut from the same cloth. It's like arguing how high is up and how wet the water really is.
DAMN you and your Vulcan logic.
Roci,
Only the mendacious and the ignorant even need the logic to be spelled out like that!
That verse from Luke popped into my head as I read the Moore quote!
Also, using Moore's logic, Jesus never mentioned arsonists, so can we conclude that Jesus approved of what arsonists do?
Moore talking about Jesus is like having the trash collector declaring himself an authority on the subject of your spouse. He may know a few things but overall he's clueless.
"Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard." -- Lev 19:27
Jesus upholds the law.
The law declares beard-cutting to be a sin.
Therefore shaving is a sin?
The problem with your solution is that it ignores the fact that in Acts 15, we read of an argument where certain among the church wanted to teach that is was necessary for Christians "to keep the law of Moses." (v5). The church declined (v 19) to uphold the law in exactly the manner you're saying Jesus did.
Therefore either the disciples turned a 180 on Jesus or you're interpreting his remarks incorrectly, I think.
El Borak,
I'm not arguing that it applies as a legal code. I am saying that it still applies as a moral guide for what is holy conduct. Jesus agreed with that in Luke 16:17. Without the law, how would you have a moral guide for what constitutes sexual immorality here?
MikeT: "I am saying that it still applies as a moral guide for what is holy conduct..."
I'm not disagreeing with your conclusion on homosexuality, but simply saying "Jesus upheld the law" as an absolute is going to lead to all manner of foolishness - if only because there are many areas of the law that have nothing to do with what we would consider holy conduct. So is shaving holy or not?
MikeT: "Jesus agreed with that in Luke 16:17"
And yet in the prior verse he said "The law and the prophets were until John." He's drawing a separation here that must be addressed in any exposition of v17, *especially* one that makes it an absolute.
MikeT: "Without the law, how would you have a moral guide for what constitutes sexual immorality here?"
Good question. Romans 2:14-5 might have the answer: "...when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law... (they) shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts ...accusing or else excusing one another."
Every society - even the Romans - has had some idea of sexual propriety and it has nearly always opposed homosexuality and adultery - in fact, adultery was a criminal offense in Rome with a stiffer penny (death on those caught in the act) than modern America and certainly stiffer than Jesus imposed.
The gentile Christians did not need Moses to tell them what was moral or immoral, and it's a bit of Christian mythology that without the Bible we would not know right from wrong. The fact that James said (Acts 15:21) Moses was read "in the synagogues" (where the gentile converts did not attend) rather than "in our churches" (where they did) illustrates that the law was not used as a primary source of Christian teaching in the early church - which it should have been if your implication were correct.
I clearly chose the wrong word...
What I was trying to say was that Jesus said that the Mosaic Law is truth, which means that Jesus did affirm that everything it says about sexual morality is at least a subset of God's standard on the matter.
Fair 'nuff. I would not be so anal about it except that it is a common mistake among those who would put Christians back under the law. That's far more dangerous to Christianity than Michael Moore's opinion...
El Borak makes an important point. The decision of the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 spells out exactly which of the Jewish civil regulations Gentiles are to observe. The case against homosexuality should be based on this, not on anything that occurred in the Gospels.
And while I certainly abhor Nazism as much as anyone, I wasn't joking about my respect for Leni Riefenstahl's talent. She wasn't just another filmmaker. If Michael Moore had her abilities, we would be seeing mass riots and people torching hospitals and stuff.
Looks like you bagged another one, or, urhm, sorta. Beat it over the head, to death, and throw it in with the other baby seals. That one only looks like it is render worthy, but it should fill a pot by itself.
I think you and El Borak are missing the point. He's talking about Jesus never having beef with homosexuality. Jesus clearly did, based on Luke 16. The stuff from Acts 15 is specific to how gentile Christians ought to live. If you listened to Michael Moore, you would think that Jesus was some "tolerant person" when it comes to homosexuality, and that his followers are all rabid bigots who don't listen to what he said.
Ok, I think we can all agree that Michael Moore doesn't know squat about Jesus or the Bible.
You're right Triton, The obvious point is that Micheal Moore doesn't know squat about Jesus. If he did, he would know that Jesus is God, The Bible is the word of God, and that the Bible very clearly condemns homosexuality. Therefore, although the gospels do not specifically condemn the act, the rest of the book, which was inspired by God(Jesus) does. Case closed Mr. Moore.
Jesus didn't tell the woman at the well, "don't worry, be happy". He told her to "go and sin no more".
Well said, Mike.
So, is it okay for a woman to "lie" next to another woman?
It's not "liked" when a man lays next to another man. ANSWER: use the kitchen counter ;)
Seriously one passage about homosexuality, in the entire Bible? Can't be! People react too insane about this subject - where does all this emotion stem from - I wonder...
Homosexuality has become very emotional because it acquired civil rights. It is the only perversion that is sanctioned by force of law.
As Christians, we have many liberties and we are not free of our own temptations to sin. But we are also not free to ignore Bibilical instruction or to change it to meet the fashion of the day. This used to be a dispassionate discussion. Threats of legal sanctions against believing Christians for failure to embrace homosexuality as a morally equal choice raises the stakes.
So, is it okay for a woman to "lie" next to another woman?
Can I watch?
If we mandated that all lesbian acts had to be monitored by interested third parties, that would solve much of it right there. Nothing like turning it into a live porno to kill the mood for most people ;)
Thus spake the Late PRophet Sam Kinison (PBUH),
Bit late to the discussion, but agree with El Borak. While Jesus does hold to the Old Testament, how it applies has changed, in that it gives us understanding of what God values, but we live by grace not by law.
I do think however Jesus spoke to homosexuality even if he didn't use the word.
It is very clear from this comment that Jesus affirmed committed heterosexual relationship (marriage). There is no place for homosexuality in this comment from Jesus; homosexuality does not conform to God's created order, that is, it does not conform to male and female and does not conform to one flesh.