People like to pick and choose. Most Christians who judge others forgot the part when Jesus said love one another like yourself.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My honest thought on this is that it's because those people are exploiting the Bible for their own political purposes. It's not politically useful for them to not eat shellfish or have rape victims marry their rapists, so they act as though those passages don't exist.

What political purpose? I do not think you are wrong, but can you give some examples?

See Pence, Mike.

I understand why Republican politicians like to talk about these issues to divide people and get them to vote out of fear and anger. But I do not understand why Christian pastors would have the same motivation.

Really?

For Catholic priests it's because the Catholic Church espouses an explicitly homophobic message.

For Protestant ministers and Mormons it's because, for most of them, the majority of their congregation is Republican: http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/party-affiliation/

So you think that taking an anti-gay stance is beneficial for priests/ministers because it makes them more likely to maintain their large socially conservative congregation and all the benefits that come with that? Money, power, influence, prestige, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My honest thought on this is that it's because those people are exploiting the Bible for their own political purposes. It's not politically useful for them to not eat shellfish or have rape victims marry their rapists, so they act as though those passages don't exist.

What political purpose? I do not think you are wrong, but can you give some examples?

See Pence, Mike.

PP here, but yes -- the immediate PP gave the answer I would have. These people are homophobic and are using the Bible to justify attacking gay people.

What is the attack? If you asked Mike Pence is stealing a sin, he'd say yes. If you asked him if gossip is a sin, he'd say yes. If you asked him is jealously is a sin, he'd say yes.

I think OP there will never be a satisfactory answer to your question. I'm a Christian and I don't "care" about any specific sin. We all sin. Period. I don't go around spouting that "this" is a sin and "that" is a sin, but if YOU ask me specifically about "this" or "that", then I'm going to have to say yes, it's a sin. Quit trying to play gotcha and just understand that we all sin and true Christians are trying not to and want that everyone know Jesus' love and saving power.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My honest thought on this is that it's because those people are exploiting the Bible for their own political purposes. It's not politically useful for them to not eat shellfish or have rape victims marry their rapists, so they act as though those passages don't exist.

What political purpose? I do not think you are wrong, but can you give some examples?

See Pence, Mike.

I understand why Republican politicians like to talk about these issues to divide people and get them to vote out of fear and anger. But I do not understand why Christian pastors would have the same motivation.

Really?

For Catholic priests it's because the Catholic Church espouses an explicitly homophobic message.

For Protestant ministers and Mormons it's because, for most of them, the majority of their congregation is Republican: http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/party-affiliation/

This has been explained to you over and over again, but go ahead and remain willfully ignorant.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My honest thought on this is that it's because those people are exploiting the Bible for their own political purposes. It's not politically useful for them to not eat shellfish or have rape victims marry their rapists, so they act as though those passages don't exist.

What political purpose? I do not think you are wrong, but can you give some examples?

See Pence, Mike.

I understand why Republican politicians like to talk about these issues to divide people and get them to vote out of fear and anger. But I do not understand why Christian pastors would have the same motivation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My honest thought on this is that it's because those people are exploiting the Bible for their own political purposes. It's not politically useful for them to not eat shellfish or have rape victims marry their rapists, so they act as though those passages don't exist.

What political purpose? I do not think you are wrong, but can you give some examples?

See Pence, Mike.

PP here, but yes -- the immediate PP gave the answer I would have. These people are homophobic and are using the Bible to justify attacking gay people.

Here is a link for someone who tries to defend this:

https://jdgreear.com/blog/why-dont-we-follow-all-of-the-old-testament-laws/

"There were Civil Laws, which governed the nation of Israel, encompassing not only behaviors, but also punishments for crimes. There were Ceremonial Laws about “clean” and “unclean” things, about various kinds of sacrifices, and other temple practices. And then there were the Moral Laws, which declared what God deemed right and wrong—the 10 Commandments, for instance."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My honest thought on this is that it's because those people are exploiting the Bible for their own political purposes. It's not politically useful for them to not eat shellfish or have rape victims marry their rapists, so they act as though those passages don't exist.

What political purpose? I do not think you are wrong, but can you give some examples?

See Pence, Mike.

Title should say rules*

And here is the link for marrying the rapist:
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+22%3A28-29&version=NIV

Anonymous wrote:My honest thought on this is that it's because those people are exploiting the Bible for their own political purposes. It's not politically useful for them to not eat shellfish or have rape victims marry their rapists, so they act as though those passages don't exist.

What political purpose? I do not think you are wrong, but can you give some examples?

Don’t forget fabric choices!
To answer your question it’s pure unfettered hypocrisy.

My honest thought on this is that it's because those people are exploiting the Bible for their own political purposes. It's not politically useful for them to not eat shellfish or have rape victims marry their rapists, so they act as though those passages don't exist.

Leviticus says this about homosexuality:
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=leviticus+18%3A22&version=NIV
Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable.

But a common question people ask then is if the rules of Leviticus are perfect, then why do people eat shellfish?
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=leviticus+11%3A9-12&version=NIV
But all creatures in the seas or streams that do not have fins and scales—whether among all the swarming things or among all the other living creatures in the water—you are to regard as unclean. 11 And since you are to regard them as unclean, you must not eat their meat.

Deuteronomy is even crazier.

A section on how women who are raped must marry their rapists:
28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.

And a section on how a woman who is not a virgin before her marriage should be stoned to death:
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+22:20-21
If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the young woman’s virginity can be found, 21 she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death.


So why do people take the part about male-male sexual relations literally but ignore the rules that say to not eat shellfish, to have rape victims marry their rapists, and to have non-virgins stoned to death at the door of their father's house?

I am asking this sincerely because I am trying to learn more about Christianity and am part of a denomination with a wide spectrum of views on LGBT issues.