Muslim Judicial Council issues short fatwa on homosexuality

[Gyre]

You have don't have a view about religion? nothing? nada?

If you have something to say about it, you hold a view... don't get wishy washy on yourself.

Nope, nothing, nada. His Santa and your Santa are different in your own minds, but both still imaginary to me. Also pretty silly to get wound up over which Santa is the right Santa.

 

[Neptuner]

Nope, nothing, nada.

Really, LOL see below:

His Santa and your Santa are different in your own minds, but both still imaginary to me. Also pretty silly to get wound up over which Santa is the right Santa.

 

[Gyre]

Really, LOL see below:

This is a difficult topic for you and we are going off topic, so we can leave it here. You win, you're smarter than a man that spent his university years studying the bible, on a subjective topic, open to interpretation.

 

[Neptuner]

This is a difficult topic for you

Not really

and we are going off topic, so we can leave it here.

Well to set the record straight, this is not about me or you. You engaged me by questioning why I stated Tutu is contradicting himself, and I substantiated. The explanation never sufficed, as you held his view dear as it somehow resonated with you, and failed to see the actual contradiction.

You win,

I apologize if I bruised your frail ego

you're smarter than a man that spent his university years studying the bible,

Again you comparing me to Tutu, you not really arguing about his contradiction. But look at your reasoning, you regard religion as irrational, yet you revere and give preference to Tutu studying the bible? ...

on a subjective topic, open to interpretation.

Perhaps Tutu interpretation being accepting of your way of thinking soothes you, and is basically all that matters whether he contradicts himself or not...

To bring the topic of discussion back on track, those who practice religion firmly by principle are having there faith question constantly, as we can see the need for many to make their position known on current affairs. Desmond Tutu was no exception, he chose the route of opposing what his god says on the matter...

 

[Gyre]

Not really

Well to set the record straight, this is not about me or you. You engaged me by questioning why I stated Tutu is contradicting himself, and I substantiated. The explanation never sufficed, as you held his view dear as it somehow resonated with you, and failed to see the actual contradiction.

I apologize if I bruised your frail ego

Again you comparing me to Tutu, you not really arguing about his contradiction. But look at your reasoning, you regard religion as irrational, yet you revere and give preference to Tutu studying the bible? ...


Perhaps Tutu interpretation being accepting of your way of thinking soothes you, and is basically all that matters whether he contradicts himself or not...

To bring the topic of discussion back on track, those who practice religion firmly by principle are having there faith question constantly, as we can see the need for many to make their position known on current affairs. Desmond Tutu was no exception, he chose the route of opposing what his god says on the matter...

If only we could ask this god their own views instead of constantly guessing

 

[Neptuner]

If only we could ask this god their own views instead of constantly guessing

Strawman...

 

[Gyre]

Strawman...

Not at all, you're arguing for a point of view that is open to 100 interpretations - we might as well be arguing @C4Cat 's stance on global warming without asking him, but instead asking 100 people what they think C4Cat meant of what somebody else wrote about him.

What is worse, is that 100 people would treat C4Cat as an authority on global warming at all, which poor C4Cat may not have even claimed or wanted to get involved in in any case.

P.S: Sorry to drag you into the example, you were the latest person apart from us two to response

 

[C4Cat]

Like me? ok

I assumed so given you have such a strong opinion on the religion and the bible and what it says and doesn't say.

 

[Neptuner]

Not at all, you're arguing for a point of view that is open to 100 interpretations - we might as well be arguing @C4Cat 's stance on global warming without asking him, but instead asking 100 people what they think C4Cat meant of what somebody else wrote about him.

Statements typically have context, lets start there lets not use vague and unnecessary analogies. This applies to the bible as well. You claiming Tutu's god is absent which is the premise of your argument which has nothing to do with him contradicting verses from the bible, clear strawman on your end. You evading the actual contradiction of Tutu by all means now a new claim: there are an array views on a matter, present each one and prove they don't fall in either or neither side of this argument, I assume you know what arguing about?

The verses are plain and clear claiming there is room to interpret them otherwise or reconcile them with other verses is not possible. The only way you end up reconciling homosexuality with the bible is by distorting the bible or explaining away the verses... in Tutu's case, definitely the former.

What is worse, is that 100 people would treat C4Cat as an authority on global warming at all, which poor C4Cat may not have even claimed or wanted to get involved in in any case.

Global warming analogy, stay on topic. The benchmark and source of Tutu's faith is the bible, you disagree? you select a version which omits these verses...

P.S: Sorry to drag you into the example, you were the latest person apart from us two to response

It's fine you are forgiven...

 

[Neptuner]

I assumed so given you have such a strong opinion on the religion and the bible and what it says and doesn't say.

Strong opinion? LOL so one is not allowed to have an opinion then it's classed as "strong". I'm sure anything north or south of "moderate" is strong...

 

[Gyre]

Statements typically have context, lets start there lets not use vague and unnecessary analogies. This applies to the bible as well. You claiming Tutu's god is absent which is the premise of your argument which has nothing to do with him contradicting verses from the bible, clear strawman on your end. You evading the actual contradiction of Tutu by all means now a new claim: there are an array views on a matter, present each one and prove they don't fall in either or neither side of this argument, I assume you know what arguing about?

The verses are plain and clear claiming there is room to interpret them otherwise or reconcile them with other verses is not possible. The only way you end up reconciling homosexuality with the bible is by distorting the bible or explaining away the verses... in Tutu's case, definitely the former.


Global warming analogy, stay on topic. The benchmark and source of Tutu's faith is the bible, you disagree? you select a version which omits these verses...

It's fine you are forgiven...

A contradiction can only exist if there a verse stating the opposite, and the Bible is full of contradictions - this is where the interpretation part comes in. If the bible was a clear cut, simple instruction manual, you wouldn't have 100 denominations and sects, or various religions with completely different interpretations.

Leaving the absent god out of this, the holy books are a lot more complex than single verses, there are also verses that come later, histories behind the verses and whole other stories happening at the same time as said verses.

As I said, it's a subjective view on the book, and impossible to argue on various grounds. I wasn't saying Tutu was right, I was saying that you were not better off trying to criticize a person that has made a specific book his entire life's work.

 

[Neptuner]

A contradiction can only exist if there a verse stating the opposite, and the Bible is full of contradictions - this is where the interpretation part comes in. If the bible was a clear cut, simple instruction manual, you wouldn't have 100 denominations and sects, or various religions with completely different interpretations.

Again being vague about verses which are clear. Sects are created when the likes of Tutu contradict themselves, perhaps take the time to read the verses pertaining to homosexuality. Then ask yourself whether this could be interpreted literally or figuratively... or perhaps there are other verses elaborating on them? have you done this?

Leaving the absent god out of this, the holy books are a lot more complex than single verses, there are also verses that come later, histories behind the verses and whole other stories happening at the same time as said verses.

Welcome abort, its called context. I could swear I'm being fed the information I'm sharing LOL

As I said, it's a subjective view on the book, and impossible to argue on various grounds.

I guess your knowledge on the matter is limited to your view on the current affairs, which is fine and explain the need to generalize. Therefore it would seem complex to you and merely brush it off as it having various grounds. Again you compounding the topic by making the matter about the bible in general, you prompted his contradiction, and there is reference to this. We've been here you not really absorbing nor contributing.

I wasn't saying Tutu was right,

and no one said you did?

I was saying that you were not better off trying to criticize a person that has made a specific book his entire life's work.

Is that what you trying to say? or is it what you are saying now? LOL you just said "Sorry" for bringing me into this, now doing it again...

 

[C4Cat]

Strong opinion? LOL so one is not allowed to have an opinion then it's classed as "strong". I'm sure anything north or south of "moderate" is strong...

Only when you're closed minded to other interpretations of the bible and the ongoing transformation of religions.
Tutu accepting homosexuality is not in contradiction to the bible or his religion. It may contradict your interpretation of the bible, and it may contradict the majority of Christian interpretations, even within his own church, but that is not the religion and he was not rejected for his interpretations, he was respected. He was an Anglican bishop and as such was part of a denomination that is accepting of homosexuality in many parts of the world, even if it's not everywhere. So no contradiction, he was not a lone voice in the church.

Anglican national churches in Brazil, South Africa, South India, New Zealand and Canada have taken steps toward approving and celebrating same-sex relationships amid strong resistance among other national churches within the 80 million-member global body. The Episcopal Church in the U.S. has allowed same-sex marriage since 2015, and the Scottish Episcopal Church has allowed same-sex marriage since 2017."[3] "Church of England clergy have appeared to signal support for gay marriage after they rejected a bishops' report which said that only a man and woman could marry in church."[4] The Church of England's 2019 General Synod was set to discuss a diocesan motion "to create a set of formal services and prayers to bless those who have had a same-sex marriage or civil partnership".[5] At General Synod in 2019, the Church of England announced that same-gender couples may remain married and recognised as married after one spouse experiences a gender transition provided that the spouses identified as opposite genders at the time of the marriage.[6][7]

In 2002, the Diocese of New Westminster, in the Anglican Church of Canada, permitted the blessing of same-sex unions. In 2003, two openly gay men in England and the United States became candidates for bishop. In the Church of England, Jeffrey John eventually succumbed to pressure to withdraw his name from consideration to be the Bishop of Reading. In the Episcopal Church in the United States, Gene Robinson was elected and consecrated Bishop of New Hampshire, becoming the first openly gay bishop in the Anglican Communion and in apostolic Christianity.

As of 2004, other Anglican provinces, including the Anglican Church of Southern Africa and the Scottish Episcopal Church, permitted the ordination of gay clergy and others, such as the Episcopal Church in the USA,[9] permitted blessing of same-sex unions as well.[10] The BBC, in 2009, reported that many clergy in the Church of England "already bless same-sex couples on an unofficial basis".[11] In South Africa, the Diocese of Saldanha Bay voted to support blessings for same-sex civil unions.[12][13] The Anglican Church of Australia's highest court ruled that a diocese may authorise the blessing rites of same-sex unions.[14][15][16] In Australia, two dioceses have done so.[17][18][19] In 2019, the Southern African Provincial Synod voted to ask dioceses to "reflect and study" a report that recommends allowing each diocese to choose to offer services of prayer for couples in same-sex civil unions.[20]

Homosexuality and the Anglican Communion - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So where is the contradiction to religion?

What Does the Bible Say About Homosexuality?

The Bible says nothing about 'homosexuality' as an innate dimension of personality. Sexual orientation was not understood in biblical times.

www.hrc.org

Again, interpretations of the bible.

 

[Howdy]

Strawman...

Pigeon chess

 

[Cosmik Debris]

Onus is on the person that made the claim to prove it.

Look up my post on water legally having to be served. Even the section number is included...

 

[Cosmik Debris]

Nope, nothing, nada. His Santa and your Santa are different in your own minds, but both still imaginary to me. Also pretty silly to get wound up over which Santa is the right Santa.

And then you can kill each other to show who has the most peaceful Santa...

 

[Defonotaltaccount]

Only when you're closed minded to other interpretations of the bible and the ongoing transformation of religions.
Tutu accepting homosexuality is not in contradiction to the bible or his religion. It may contradict your interpretation of the bible, and it may contradict the majority of Christian interpretations, even within his own church, but that is not the religion and he was not rejected for his interpretations, he was respected. He was an Anglican bishop and as such was part of a denomination that is accepting of homosexuality in many parts of the world, even if it's not everywhere. So no contradiction, he was not a lone voice in the church.

Homosexuality and the Anglican Communion - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So where is the contradiction to religion?

What Does the Bible Say About Homosexuality?

The Bible says nothing about 'homosexuality' as an innate dimension of personality. Sexual orientation was not understood in biblical times.

www.hrc.org

Again, interpretations of the bible.

Heretical teachings do not change the original teachings.

 

[C4Cat]

Heretical teachings do not change the original teachings.

How would you know what the original teachings were?

 

[Defonotaltaccount]

How would you know what the original teachings were?

If you read the bible.
You would know you are spouting nonsense.
You are intentionally poisoning a debate.

 

[saturnz]

How would you know what the original teachings were?

You can't

The earliest manuscripts of the old testament is atleast 1000 years after Moses. It's not complete and the authors are unknown and we have nothing to independently verify its authenticity.

The new testament authors are seemingly not direct eye witnesses to Jesus's gospel, so that's another problem.