About Christian Unity

Post Reply New Topic

First, I want to say that you are a good christian, and I really mean it

I agree with you that most of them need to change in a lot of things, the fundamentalists like our friend here, are the problem, and this is controversial actually, that is why I think your perception of christian bashing must have been, because actually is more about some BS from them that affects ga/bi/transgendered people because they want to repress their rights and they do have discrimination against them.


Ragtime talks about sodomy, when he forgets that sodomy was used not only to describe same-sex relationships but with heterosexual relationships as well, anything that was different from vaginal penetration and even the missionary position, was considered sodomy. He knows this, but he ignores it.

Sorry Ragtime, I didn't explain myself well enough. I know you believe in and believe you "know" personally God and the Bible. I meant the "problem" is between you (Christians in general, as well) and atheists (and non-Christian religious peoples), or people who don't believe in God and the Bible, when debating. All our preconceptions, if you will, are probably pretty much immutable and thus we can never come to a conclusion to these discussions.

Errr, I myself was never on a debate team.....

If that's what it means in common usage, why does everything think only of "up the butt" whenever they hear "sodomy"? I did notice Merriam Webster defines sodomy as oral, anal, or human+animal sex, which is confusing because everyone considers it to just mean "up the butt". In most uses, that's what it means.

I'm not planning on ever having sex again, but if I do, and I've found out oral is wrong, I won't do it. I will admit, it kinda always seemed wrong somehow. (Of course, it also seemed right in a way.)

Last edited by Ragtime on 23 Aug 2007, 3:11 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Legally sodomy means much more, anything that might be considered unusual, i.e., not missionary man/woman sex.

Mostly because making the connection from sodom and gomorrah with homosexuality and anal sex, but also oral sex is included within the term of sodomy in the actual days. But years ago sodomy was considered in any act without vaginal penetration, man on top, even if it was just mutual masturbation I believe it was considered sodomy if there was no penetration there. Just ask Paul and you will see what I mean. That illustrates the lack of knowledge about sexuality at the time.


So this thing about women sucking better than men, was just BS then?

Everyone has some good and some evil in them. This would mean that it would not be wrong for God to kill everyone if your assumptions held. If it is the case that it is wrong for human beings to kill another who is judged evil, this would mean human morality is something separate from divine morality. Theist philosophers generally prescribe to God a perfection of all those qualities found to be good in humans, so they would define God as achieving absolute perfection in will and (human) morality. However, your use of God seems to be at odds with human morality, and although I don't know what would constitute the wholly good (morally) for a divine entity, but from a human perspective, your god does not sound wholly good and is not something I would consider worthy of worship and praise.

I just wrote this amazing thing to you all. It was so witty, wise, and oh so well written, then a finger hit something and POOF I was humbled, once again, by the universe which seems intent on keeping me small. Anyway, I love the discussion!