Biblical matters

[Dave]

I'm no expert but as the Bible wouldn't tolerate gay marriage, an elder is an extremely crucial position within the church, someone who displays wisdom on all things biblical and takes the bible's principals as their own (as all Christians should) then by default, while you are correct in saying the bible doesn't black and white say you can't hold those views, logic would dictate that they ideally shouldn't

The Bible doesn't mention gay marriage.

It doesn't mention smoking either but I would still take it to be something a Christian shouldn't really do through interpretations of other passages

Interpret? Which Bible? There are a lot. The word homosexual is used in a lot of versions which is a mistranslation of a Greek word that actually means male temple prostitute. It would be disruptive to have prostitutes offering hand offs in a temple. But gays are allowed.

No - there's one bible, with a lot of translations. Marriage in my eyes should be between man and woman - God said when creating Eve "it is not good that man should not be alone" then created eve as his wife. If God permits gay marriage, why then not create another man also and give Adam the option to choose? Why also choose to destroy Sodom & Gomorrah for their lifestyle?

I know you're a decent bloke Dave but I somehow don't think a dispute is going to be settled over a message board - I have time for your opinion, as I hope you would have time for mine, and if you want the conversation to continue, feel free to PM, but I somehow I doubt either of our minds will be changed across a forum

I don't do PMs. I prefer to discuss on a forum because that's why I forum.

Sodom and Gomorrah was more about the attempted rape of some men by a mob. Lot offers his daughters for rape but they decline. There's no direct reference for the destruction of the place for them all being gay. In the ot eating seafood was gonna get you executed.

Even if I believed in a literal Adam and Eve, there is no justification in stating that god would not permit gay marriage because he didn't create two men. It always about sex. God would have needed a male and female to create babies.

Being gay is not a choice.

[Dave]

They liked a drink in the Bible which contravenes the body is a temple thing. The counter arguement to that is that the brewing/fermenting process provided a more sterile drink in them times but could God not have shown them how to boil water and make tay like the Asians did?

As a slight aside, it's f&cking gratifying to learn that cants that swear have been shown to be more honest than those who don't.

Oh yeah, they definitely did. No, I dont think the fermenting process was much different, drunkenness was mentioned right from genesis, so it still had the same effect back then as it does now. I would occasionally have the odd drink, not a big fan of the taste though

Do you masterbate? Just asking.

I do.

[Dave]

Is this even a rugby forum?

Yeah let's get back to f1

[BR]

Can't think what the security om loans thing is about.

Usury is a sin, but I'm not sure how the security or lack thereof alters that. It would be the interest that would be the problem on a standard loan. Although as Baggy is a non-christian man, the traditional interpretation would be that they would be innocent of any sins.

I'm sure somebody has read between the particular translation of the particular books of the particular scriptures to interpret it to mean that Baggy can lend him the cash and provided he only gives no more than his word to pay him what is owed, then it would be fine.

[222toHounslow]

Paul Marshall is a Bellend.

[Brian Dunn 382]

Not entering in to debate. Just a couple of points
1. The religious people in the bible called Jesus "a wine biber and a gluttonous man" because he dined with "publicans and sinners"
2. Jesus never condemned "sinners". He did condemn the religious leaders who set standards for others but did not adhere to them.

It's interesting what you see when you read the bible.

[Rooster]

I'll not condemn a man for his personal religious views (provided he's not hurting anyone else). I just thought smoking was an odd example. I don't smoke, but that's largely because it would statistically hasten my death, not because I can read between the lines of a particular translation of the Bible. (Same net result, of course)

Cheeseburgers are pretty much explicitly banned in the bible, and according to many will also hasten death. I choose to ignore that medical advice, but I don't have to square that with my personal interpretation of Leviticus before unwrapping my Big Mac.

Sorry, I just wasn't aware that there was much of a movement out there for whom smoking was considered unholy. I was aware that for some abstainence from smoking could be considered holy, but that is subtly different.

Each to there own, and if you prefer to take this to PM (since it relates to your personal beliefs), I'll be more than happy to listen.

Presbyterians used to frown upon smoking, we had a minister once who loved a wee sneaky puff of his pipe but was very careful where and when he participated in the demon tobacco, he liked a wee dram as well but only a select few sinners knew that

[BaggyTrousers]

They liked a drink in the Bible which contravenes the body is a temple thing. The counter arguement to that is that the brewing/fermenting process provided a more sterile drink in them times but could God not have shown them how to boil water and make tay like the Asians did?

As a slight aside, it's f&cking gratifying to learn that cants that swear have been shown to be more honest than those who don't.

Oh yeah, they definitely did. No, I dont think the fermenting process was much different, drunkenness was mentioned right from genesis, so it still had the same effect back then as it does now. I would occasionally have the odd drink, not a big fan of the taste though

Do you masterbate? Just asking.

As for the loan, security has no biblical foundation, not to my knowledge however, I suspect you were as well approached by a free-p, suit wearing man with bible in hand, I also suspect if you had given him thay money you wouldn't have seen the money ever return

In all honesty as soon as he said he was a Christian and I would be assured of repayment, my mind was already made up. Not because he was a Christian, for I had of course innumerable excellent customers who "enjoyed" that character flaw, but simply because he sought to persuade me by reason of faith, I never had any other person in my entire career try to play the God Card. It insulted my intelligence and I just wanted to bitchslap him & tell him to get the feck out of my office.

As is obvious, my role as an expert does not hold up in the field of religion, however I think I may be correct that there is a ban on pledging security in Islam, I could well be wrong.

[BaggyTrousers]

Can't think what the security om loans thing is about.

Usury is a sin, but I'm not sure how the security or lack thereof alters that. It would be the interest that would be the problem on a standard loan. Although as Baggy is a non-christian man, the traditional interpretation would be that they would be innocent of any sins.

I'm sure somebody has read between the particular translation of the particular books of the particular scriptures to interpret it to mean that Baggy can lend him the cash and provided he only gives no more than his word to pay him what is owed, then it would be fine.

Point of order BR.

As you correctly point out I am not a religious man. Sin is a religious concept, I do not place any credence in such nonsense, hence I react badly when some collaredbastard*** calls me a sinner, irrespective of whether or not he is speaking to a group, many of whom may well accept this idiotic notion.

I think my attitude to this whole religious bullshit is to tell you all to stuff your commandments, abominations and the rest up yer arses, just try to live by this simple rule, "Don't be a dick", I don't always succeed, I'm not a budgie after all, but it is that simple, the rest is decorous twaddle for the masses ...........and church services too.

***Not all wearers of dogcollars are either dogs or collaredbastards, as you will be aware I have enjoyed highly cordial relationships with many religious folk.

[mid ulster maestro]

I was on a recuitment panel a while ago. The post was for a lab technician. This guy walked in sat down and placed a bible on the table. Every question we asked, obviously relating to the job, was preceded with "as the good book says" or " in the words of our Lord" followed by a biblical reference. Surprisingly he didn't get hired but it was seriously difficult to maintain a professional attitude whilst being preached to at a job interview.

[Rooster]

I was on a recuitment panel a while ago. The post was for a lab technician. This guy walked in sat down and placed a bible on the table. Every question we asked, obviously relating to the job, was preceded with "as the good book says" or " in the words of our Lord" followed by a biblical reference. Surprisingly he didn't get hired but it was seriously difficult to maintain a professional attitude whilst being preached to at a job interview.

He is probably in consultation with his solicitors at present

[BaggyTrousers]

I was on a recuitment panel a while ago. The post was for a lab technician. This guy walked in sat down and placed a bible on the table. Every question we asked, obviously relating to the job, was preceded with "as the good book says" or " in the words of our Lord" followed by a biblical reference. Surprisingly he didn't get hired but it was seriously difficult to maintain a professional attitude whilst being preached to at a job interview.

He is probably in consultation with his solicitors at present

Very possibly Rooster, sounds very like a chap who is trying hard to make himself unemployable and perhaps looking for easy money at tribunals .................. then again maybe he is the return of Jesus, here to test MUM and his acolytes.

[Dave]

I was on a recuitment panel a while ago. The post was for a lab technician. This guy walked in sat down and placed a bible on the table. Every question we asked, obviously relating to the job, was preceded with "as the good book says" or " in the words of our Lord" followed by a biblical reference. Surprisingly he didn't get hired but it was seriously difficult to maintain a professional attitude whilst being preached to at a job interview.

He is probably in consultation with his solicitors at present

Very possibly Rooster, sounds very like a chap who is trying hard to make himself unemployable and perhaps looking for easy money at tribunals .................. then again maybe he is the return of Jesus, here to test MUM and his acolytes.

Christians can't sue people! They have to turn the other cheek.

[Tender]

Just because their book tells them the shouldn't, it doesn't mean they wouldn't . The vast majority of folk who call themselves Christian, indulge in selective cherry picking of 'The good Book' (no, not War and Peace) and ignore the passages which make life difficult for themselves, or cost them money.
In over half a century on this planet, I've met very few who didn't exude and air of superiority, which is pretty standard, given they believe they are correct in their beliefs and we are all wrong/unrepentant sinners, therefore they are superior to us sinners and better than us.
Doubtless all Christian UR supporters are fine individuals, who would never be so silly as to look down their hooters at a non believer, but their antique thinking on gay marriage, homosexuality and bum fun in general, creates a chasm which they cannot close They'd have better luck trying to pick up a turd by the clean end.

[UlsterAreBrill]

Apologies for late reply Dave, been a busy weekend

We clearly are going to have a pretty big difference of opinion here. Anyway, can you tell me where it talks about the 'male temple prostitutes' with reference please? Just interested. Also, it was a mob of men at Sodom & Gomorrah who wanted to rape the angels so I very much doubt this was the first time they would have practised any sort of homosexuality or else what would have been the reason to destroy the city? Romans 1 vs 26-27, in a paraphrase, says that women gave up natural relations with those contrary to nature and men also gave up natural relations with women in order to fulfil their passions with one another, which was the reason for God's judgement. In my eyes that a pretty clear argument against gay marriage

I would also be inclined to say that it is a valid argument to point to Adam and Eve as a point against gay marriage. After the creation of Eve, God said "man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh" It's quite clear that's a pretty specific use of gender there in the context of marriage, clearly it is making it gender specific