Students Protest Rejection of Christian Books on Homosexuality

[Springfield]

I wouldn't expect that you could. Mostly because you, like me and most of the others around these days grew up in a society where pre-marital sex was an accepted activity. It may have been frowned upon but there were no legal or societal punishments for those who chose to engage in the activity.

These ideals will not change overnight. It will take time to put the societal roadblocks back in place; but I believe it needs to be done if this society is ever going to get back on track.

I think that something like this would be very difficult to implement and I wouldn't really agree anyhow.

The thing is, people never really are equal, Springfield. We like to pretend that people are, but in reality it's not true; nor do I believe that we were ever really intended to be. I don't believe that men and women were intended to be equals of each other. I don't believe that individuals who are willing to put the effort in to improve their lives are intended to be the equal of those who simply look for handouts. I don't believe that those who were chosen to be born into proper societies (like the US could and should be) are intended to be the equals of those who were not. Just my :2cents:

While I do agree that their are many inequalities and that is the way things are, I always try to treat others how I want to be treated. It's corny, I know, but I think the "treat others how you want to be treated" could go a long way in this society.

It has significant differences, and I believe we need to embrace SOME of those differences and use them to help turn our society around.

What differences you would you point to that could turn our society around?

[Mass_SkinsFan]

I think that something like this would be very difficult to implement and I wouldn't really agree anyhow.

I agree it would be difficult to implement, and would probably take longer to reinstall in our society than it did to break down; but I see it as a good and necessary concept.

While I do agree that their are many inequalities and that is the way things are, I always try to treat others how I want to be treated. It's corny, I know, but I think the "treat others how you want to be treated" could go a long way in this society.

There are still many inequalities in our society today. Personally, I think there probably need to be more, rather than less compared to today, but that's a personal viewpoint. The "treat others how you want to be treated" philosophy works great inside a particular sub-group as I discussed earlier, but when you're talking about crossing groups, it becomes problematic in my mind.

What differences you would you point to that could turn our society around?

Their views on punishment for one thing. Criminals are treated completely differently in that society than they are here. It works not only to punish those who offend, but to make others think twice about offending. Also the fact that morals and values are integrated into their legal system much more than we do currently.

[techboy]

I'm right.

What is it that you are right about?

Moses was Egyptian and you know it. The legend of Sargon was used to explain him into being jewish.

Please cite one reputable scholar of the past 30 years that shows that the story of Moses was stolen from Sargon.

Argue it all you want, influences of the past and surrounding and preexisting cultures are prevalent in the Bible. As they are with many other religions.

Saying that the authors of the texts that make up the Bible were influenced by the culture around them (which is obvious) is a very different matter from claiming, as you have, that the Bible stories were simply ripped off wholesale from earlier stories. That's the part I object to, and that is the case that you haven't even come close to making.

Yeah dude.. It comes from the internet..

I saw on the internet the other day that the Earth is actually flat.

I know you've read both the bible and the epic of Gilgamesh. If you don't want to see the similarities that even what you cite say are there, that is your problem.

Again you miss the point. It's not that there are not similarities. It's that simple similarity does not prove literary borrowing.

You claim I learned what I've learned from the internet, I haven't. You on the other hand seem to be all too pleased to find sources that protect your text as something original.

Actually, most of the information I use comes from books and journals, and if you read my post, you'd see that quite a few of my citations were from books like that of T N D Mettinger.

Influence of the Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Zoroastrianism.. All of these things exist in the Bible. It's only a debate to people that don't want to accept the way humans in that time created religions and religious texts.

It's also not a debate to the experts in the field, many of whom I have cited, that have rejected parallelism and your point of view.

You can dismiss me as a faith based reasoner if you like, but if you dismiss the numerous experts I cited in my last post, I'd have to say it is you who are clinging to a cherished idea against reason and logic.

It is as plain as day, you are only fooling yourself. To me it does not take away from Christianity, to you it seems to me that you're willing to sacrifice logic with faith.

One of us is citing numerous qualified experts of all stripes. The other is repeating tired, defeated arguments and resorting to ad hominem. You be the judge.

The faithful.

You know, I clicked those links hoping for some kind of credible sources backing up your argument...

[IHOPSkins]

.....I do not care that Christians ahve their beliefs, i care that they are worried so much with projecting and imposing their beliefs on others......

We are talking about a book on a shelf in the Library...one that is checked out voluntarily???

Not a Class on Conservative Christianity

[Vicious]

No one said they rip the stories off wholesale they have their own twists to them.

My arguments are not defeated. They're plain as day. You can twist it anyway you want. You can claim it's coincidence. That's fine by me, people will go great lengths to hide from the truth, especially a truth that can be blurred with time. I don't need anything but to put the legends of Sargon and the Epic of Gilgamesh next to the stories of the Bible.

The Jews survived. The Sumerians did not, the Assyrians did not, the Zoroastrians..did..sort of, the Babylonians didn't. The Jews get to write their history, the Christians get to write their history. In the end it doesn't matter where it comes from. Hell the guy that decided what would go into it was a Roman Emperor. How's that for a editor.

Yet still as clever and prepared as you are..

Moses.. an awfully Egyptian name isn't it?

edit: You have to be a true believer to think that the Bible is the word of the desert god Yahweh. That Christ is the lord and savior. That Moses was raised by the Egyptian King as his son. That there were talking bushes. That Jesus resurrected. That there is a heaven. That there is a hell. That a giant boat was constructed and the millions upon millions of insect species were gathered. You're one of those people. That's fine, live in your world. It's a short trip for all of us, you can enjoy it how you want. Just leave the gays alone.

[Vicious]

We are talking about a book on a shelf in the Library...one that is checked out voluntarily???

Not a Class on Conservative Christianity

Would you want a book saying Black people are the spawn of the devil in your kids school library?

[techboy]

My arguments are not defeated. They're plain as day. You can twist it anyway you want. You can claim it's coincidence. That's fine by me, people will go great lengths to hide from the truth, especially a truth that can be blurred with time. I don't need anything but to put the legends of Sargon and the Epic of Gilgamesh next to the stories of the Bible.

The experts disagree with you. Take that as you will.

Hell the guy that decided what would go into it was a Roman Emperor. How's that for a editor.

Ah... No. The idea that Constantine selected the books of the Bible at the Council of Nicea is yet another tired old myth, except that this one was never held to by reputable scholars, as far as I know (at least parallelism used to be respectable).

The Council of Nicea never addressed the issue of the Canon at all. It largely dealt with the heresy of Arius.

In response to this heresy, the Bishops adopted the Nicene Creed, by a nearly unaminous vote, affirming that Jesus was in fact God, uncreated.

From the Catholic Encyclopedia

The creed:

We believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten of the Father, that is, of the substance [ek tes ousias] of the Father, God of God, light of light, true God of true God, begotten not made, of the same substance with the Father [homoousion to patri], through whom all things were made both in heaven and on earth; who for us men and our salvation descended, was incarnate, and was made man, suffered and rose again the third day, ascended into heaven and cometh to judge the living and the dead. And in the Holy Ghost. Those who say: There was a time when He was not, and He was not before He was begotten; and that He was made our of nothing (ex ouk onton); or who maintain that He is of another hypostasis or another substance [than the Father], or that the Son of God is created, or mutable, or subject to change, [them] the Catholic Church anathematizes.

The vote:

The adhesion was general and enthusiastic. All the bishops save five declared themselves ready to subscribe to this formula, convince that it contained the ancient faith of the Apostolic Church. The opponents were soon reduced to two, Theonas of Marmarica and Secundus of Ptolemais, who were exiled and anathematized. Arius and his writings were also branded with anathema, his books were cast into the fire, and he was exiled to Illyria. The lists of the signers have reached us in a mutilated condition, disfigured by faults of the copyists. Nevertheless, these lists may be regarded as authentic. Their study is a problem which has been repeatedly dealt with in modern times, in Germany and England, in the critical editions of H. Gelzer, H. Hilgenfeld, and O. Contz on the one hand, and C. H. Turner on the other. The lists thus constructed give respectively 220 and 218 names. With information derived from one source or another, a list of 232 or 237 fathers known to have been present may be constructed.

Here's a list of the other issues discussed:

Canon 1: On the admission, or support, or expulsion of clerics mutilated by choice or by violence.

Canon 2: Rules to be observed for ordination, the avoidance of undue haste, the deposition of those guilty of a grave fault.

Canon 3: All members of the clergy are forbidden to dwell with any woman, except a mother, sister, or aunt.

Canon 4: Concerning episcopal elections.

Canon 5: Concerning the excommunicate.

Canon 6: Concerning patriarchs and their jurisdiction.

Canon 7: confirms the right of the bishops of Jerusalem to enjoy certain honours.

Canon 8: concerns the Novatians.

Canon 9: Certain sins known after ordination involve invalidation.

Canon 10: Lapsi who have been ordained knowingly or surreptitiously must be excluded as soon as their irregularity is known.

Canon 11: Penance to be imposed on apostates of the persecution of Licinius.

Canon 12: Penance to be imposed on those who upheld Licinius in his war on the Christians.

Canon 13: Indulgence to be granted to excommunicated persons in danger of death.

Canon 14: Penance to be imposed on catechumens who had weakened under persecution.

Canon 15: Bishops, priests, and deacons are not to pass from one church to another.

Canon 16: All clerics are forbidden to leave their church. Formal prohibition for bishops to ordain for their diocese a cleric belonging to another diocese.

Canon 17: Clerics are forbidden to lend at interest.

Canon 18: recalls to deacons their subordinate position with regard to priests.

Canon 19: Rules to be observed with regard to adherents of Paul of Samosata who wished to return to the Church.

Canon 20: On Sundays and during the Paschal season prayers should be said standing.

The business of the Council having been finished Constantine celebrated the twentieth anniversary of his accession to the empire, and invited the bishops to a splendid repast, at the end of which each of them received rich presents. Several days later the emperor commanded that a final session should be held, at which he assisted in order to exhort the bishops to work for the maintenance of peace; he commended himself to their prayers, and authorized the fathers to return to their dioceses. The greater number hastened to take advantage of this and to bring the resolutions of the council to the knowledge of their provinces.

They never discussed the books of the Bible at all, and it was never a close vote as to Jesus' divinity. Those are two historical myths. Constantine died soon after, and the councils that closed the Canon occured after that.

The Council of Nicea had nothing to do with the composition, compilation, or nature of the documents of the New Testament at all.

Nothing.

Nada.

Zip.

I have never seen a single reliable scholar that indicates otherwise, or even hints at it.

I mean, seriously, are you doing your research with the collected works of Dan Brown?

Besides, we have multiple manuscripts where even the copies date before Nicea, which is about the first time that the Church would even have had the power to try to pull something like that off.

Not to mention all of the references in the Apostolic Fathers, which start in AD 90 or so.

Yet still as clever and prepared as you are..

Thank you.

Moses.. an awfully Egyptian name isn't it?

Yes, most scholars these days argue so. Of course, he was named by an Egyptian, so...

edit: You have to be a true believer to think that the Bible is the word of the desert god Yahweh. That Christ is the lord and savior. That Moses was raised by the Egyptian King as his son. That there were talking bushes. That Jesus resurrected. That there is a heaven. That there is a hell. That a giant boat was constructed and the millions upon millions of insect species were gathered. You're one of those people. That's fine, live in your world. It's a short trip for all of us, you can enjoy it how you want. Just leave the gays alone.

1. Have I attacked the gays?

2. Categorize me as one of "those people" if you like, but the scholars I cite are not dismissed so easily.

[desioreo87]

Okay... You're wrong.

The Christian view of homosexual behavior is that it is a sin, no better or worse than any other sexual sin (like pre-marital sex). Like any sin, it is enough to seperate a person from God, but also like any sin, it can be forgiven through Jesus' sacrifice.

1 Corinthians 6:9-11 (ESV)

ok, techboy, thanks for the clarification. No i have to ask, is there any way to salvation if one were to remain homosexual?

[desioreo87]

We are talking about a book on a shelf in the Library...one that is checked out voluntarily???

Not a Class on Conservative Christianity

clearly, i went pretty general with that statement. But i still dont think that book should be in public school libraries.

[techboy]

ok, techboy, thanks for the clarification. No i have to ask, is there any way to salvation if one were to remain homosexual?

Sure. All Christians are saved, homosexual or not. When Paul talks about what his readers once were, he's not saying that they stop sinning, but rather that because of Jesus, God doesn't see them that way any longer.

Of course, Christians are supposed to stop sinning, so a homosexual Christian should not be having sex, just as a heterosexual Christian should not be having sex outside the bounds of marriage.

"Should not" and "don't" are two different things of course, and all Christians still screw up.

[IHOPSkins]

Would you want a book saying Black people are the spawn of the devil in your kids school library?

Did you write it?

[Vicious]

Yeah he was named after an Egyptian because he was one.

Save your fingers, I never said anything about the decision over Arianism. Constantine was the power behind those that made their teachings orthodox. He definitely had a role in the canonization of the bible. You're going to deny that?

[Vicious]

Did you write it?

It was a best seller for 3 weeks.

[techboy]

Yeah he was named after an Egyptian because he was one.

You have overwhelmed me with your exhaustive research and citation of experts. I must concede the point.

Save your fingers, I never said anything about the decision over Arianism.

I know you didn't. But, since the silly theory on the internet is that Constantine set the Canon at Nicea, I thought it would be helpful to inform you as to what actually happened at Nicea.

Constantine was the power behind those that made their teachings orthodox. He definitely had a role in the canonization of the bible. You're going to deny that?

Yes, I'm going to deny that. It's not true, and again, I defy you to provide even one credible expert that says that it is.

*Edit*Let me help. FF Bruce was head of the Department of Biblical History and Literature at the University of Sheffield, then Rylands Professor of Biblical Criticism and Exegesis at the University of Manchester. He probably knows what he's talking about.

Here is an article he wrote: THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

You will note that consensus on which texts were Scripture was forming hundreds of years before Constantine, while final official Canonization occurs well after his death.

The idea that Constantine selected the canon is ahistorical conspiracy theory with zero evidence to support it.

And frankly, it's really silly as you apply it, since you're trying to talk about the Old Testament, which was set by the Jews before Jesus, let alone Constantine. Ever hear of the Septuagint?

[Capt Rich Fla]

No, but having one that specifically targets homosexuals and calls it sin against God does bother me.

There's another book that calls it a sin against God too. You know which one.

[Midnight Judges]

Does anybody know if there are copies of the Bible, Torah, Koran, Veda's etc. in the school libraries?

I would think not in Fairfax county.

[techboy]

I would think not in Fairfax county.

You would think wrong.

Here... Look for yourself on FCPS' online catalog.

All sorts of religious books, including the Bible.

Which just points up the fact that professional librarians are just that, professionals, and very unlikely to be censoring books based on personal feelings. If they say the books didn't meet standards, then the books didn't meet standards.

[Midnight Judges]

You would think wrong.

Here... Look for yourself on FCPS' online catalog.

All sorts of religious books, including the Bible.

Which just points up the fact that professional librarians are just that, professionals, and very unlikely to be censoring books based on personal feelings. If they say the books didn't meet standards, then the books didn't meet standards.

Interesting. I searched for books at my elementary school and found all sorts of religious books that I never encountered when I was there. Kind of takes the wind out of the argument that they are censoring religious POVs. Then again, personally, I would prefer it if they observed a strict separation.

Either way, I did K-12 in FCPS and Religion was very much left out of the classroom as it should be IMO.

[Springfield]

Either way, I did K-12 in FCPS and Religion was very much left out of the classroom as it should be IMO.

Agreed.

I also attended FCPS all my life and never encountered any religious books. Probably because I wasn't looking for them. As a kid I was tending to things that were "much more important" at the moment, you know, girls, friends and such. I didn't really visit the library unless it was study time and I needed material for research.

I think that this would hold true for 95% of the students currently attending FCPS as well.

[Vicious]

You will note that consensus on which texts were Scripture was forming hundreds of years before Constantine, while final official Canonization occurs well after his death.

So I guess the bibles he ordered for Constantinople never existed. :doh:

Floods, two of every animal in a giant boat, baby being adopted by a king after being placed in the river and found by the queen. You can argue around that all you want. It just is what it is. You're not going to convince me or many other people that the Bible was manifested all on it's own by the hand of man through God(Yahweh the Desert God). It was penned by men, with the ideas and stories of men.

[alexey]

I see nothing wrong with a library filtering out crappy books.

I see chances of books in question being crappy to be fairly high.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

I see nothing wrong with a library filtering out crappy books.

I see chances of books in question being crappy to be fairly high.

Probably no worse than the "Two Princes" book that caused such a flap here in Massachusetts a couple of years ago when it was read to some elementary school kids.

[alexey]

Probably no worse than the "Two Princes" book that caused such a flap here in Massachusetts a couple of years ago when it was read to some elementary school kids.

I suspect this issue will be increasingly more difficult to handle properly considering we will see an ever-rising amount of this kind of garbage.

We are currently seing micro-targeting w/ ads and emails and such, but consider what things will look like in a few years.

[alexey]

Probably no worse than the "Two Princes" book that caused such a flap here in Massachusetts a couple of years ago when it was read to some elementary school kids.

I suspect this issue will be increasingly more difficult to handle properly considering we will see an ever-rising amount of this kind of garbage.

We are currently seing micro-targeting w/ ads and emails and such, but consider what things will look like in a few years.

[ACW]

Sure. All Christians are saved, homosexual or not. When Paul talks about what his readers once were, he's not saying that they stop sinning, but rather that because of Jesus, God doesn't see them that way any longer.

Of course, Christians are supposed to stop sinning, so a homosexual Christian should not be having sex, just as a heterosexual Christian should not be having sex outside the bounds of marriage.

"Should not" and "don't" are two different things of course, and all Christians still screw up.

So it's not being homosexual, it's having homosexual SEX.

More of that "love the sinner, hate the sin" :bsflag: