hannukah harry

if this is the wrong place to post this, mods, feel free to move.

i'm trying to find out where in the bible (chapter, verse) jesus says "love the sinner, hate the sin" and also where it is said that the covenant with the isrealites has been completed and it's a new covenant in the new testament?

thanks!

__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer

ShaniFaye

according to google

"Hate the sin, love the sinner." First of all, it doesn't come from the Bible, it's a quote from Saint Augustine (354-430 C.E.),

__________________
I want the diabetic plan that comes with rollover carbs. I dont like the unused one expiring at midnite!!

SecretMethod70

Neither are explicitly stated in the Bible.

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

hannukah harry

thanks, SF... i've been writing papers all day didn't even think of google... my minds pretty fried and it's only 3:30pm.

SM... that's rather interesting...

does anyone know where the rational for getting rid of the laws in the torah and replacing them with the bible comes from then?

__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer

SecretMethod70

I should say, the wording that Jesus is a new covenant to replace the old covenant is not explicitly stated as far as I'm aware. However, there are times in which Mosaic Law is spoken of and Jesus is said to fulfill and perfect it. I can't think of specific examples offhand, but these links may help a bit. The site is a conservative-leaning (IMO) Catholic site. I haven't read the articles myself, but as with anything regarding religion it is important to keep in mind that with pretty much anything you read, with the exception of the most basic teachings such as Jesus being fully mortal yet fully divine, there may be a group of Christians and/or theologians who hold a variant belief. Hopefully these pages can help in finding what you're looking for though...

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10582c.htm
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09071a.htm

A Biblical exerpt for you as well.... (note: of course, the Bible is a largely interpretive book, so take from this what you will)...

http://www.biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/...atthew+5:13-48

This specific topic and viewpoint is not something I give much consideration to, so bear in mind that I'm basically just throwing stuff out here. I don't know how right or wrong any of this is, but here ya go - hope it helps

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

asaris

Matthew 5:17:
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfill them."

Thanks to gospelcom.net/bible

__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."

"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche

KMA-628

A couple of places, in my opinion.

1) The destruction of the "temple" which represented Jewish law and the temple being rebuilt in three days (i.e. Jesus now represents the new law).

2) The big one for me is the tearing of the curtain leading to the altar, which (according to Jewish law) separated man from God.

Without breaking the book out, I cannot recite actual verses from memory. If you peruse the end chapters of the gospels you will find this and more.

asaris

Good points, KMA. There is also Peter's vision of the unclean animals. God says to eat them, Peter says "But they're unclean!" and God says, essentially, that doesn't matter anymore.

__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."

"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche

hannukah harry

thanks for the responses so far guys.

basically, i'm writing a 'reflection' paper for a class and have chosen to talk about Proposal 2 (gay marraige ban in michigan). i'm trying to understand the position against gay marriage, specifically the religious reasons. i know about the various stories from the torah that are used against gay marriage. while i disagree with the interpretation of those, i wasn't sure why those still were considered relevant by christians when other areas of the torah aren't. it seems like cherry picking to me.

since i'd never seen where the specific reference to 'hate the sin, love the sinner' and how some parts of the torah are still used by christians but others aren't, both of which would seem to point to being accepting of homosexuals (even if they're sinning) and (if all of the torah was considered to be fulfilled) whether or not homosexuality should even be considered a sin anymore.

i wanted to be a little more clear on things before i finished writing it so that it could be as accurate as possible. i appreciate the help!

__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer

Lebell

I think the source was John Spong, but I recall that the ancient Hebrews didn't have the idea of Heaven and Hell that we have now and that it was through a male heir that a person (man) lived on.

Therefore a homosexual automatically condemned himself to "eternal death" simply because he would not have children.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

asaris

There are many arguments for the traditional Christian position that homosexual activity is sinful, the best of which don't rely on Levitical passages. This passage, from the Roman Catholic office "Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith", gives a pretty good argument against state sponsorship of gay marriage.http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/co...unions_en.html. It's worth checking out for your topic.

Lebell is right; the concept of the afterlife among ancient Hebrews seems to have been comparable to the Greek conception of Hades -- a sort of half-life of shadows. By the time of Christ, there seems to have been some argument regarding the resurrection of the dead, but I don't know when this concept enters the Jewish mythos.

__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."

"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche

martinguerre

do note, however, that the same word translated for abomination is also used for those who eat shell fish. relying on levitical codes is not really sound practice for Christians after Peter.

www.godhatesshrimp.com

__________________
For God so loved creation, that God sent God's only Son that whosoever believed should not perish, but have everlasting life.

-John 3:16

hannukah harry

you guys have been wonderful. it's great to have some good starting off points and hopefully i'll take them on wonderful tangents.

in regards to the jewish after-life though, i do not believe resurrection has ever been a part of the jewish mythos (well, i think lazarus may be from the torah, but i'm not sure). but one thing i do remember from hebrew school is that the belief was there was a heaven (not sure what it was supposed to be like) and then there was a 'waiting place.' not quite purgatory, more like a limbo where your soul would wait until entering heaven. kind of like a 'time out.' (remember though, this is filtered by about 12 years of not doing anything religous since then).

another thing my teacher brought up (he was an orthodox rabbi... i'm not sure what differences in interpretation there are between them and the conservatives and reforms), was that jewish belief held that the number of jewish souls was equal to the number that left eqypt with moses and there have been no new ones since. and while there are obviously more jews now than then, the idea is that those souls now occupy multiple bodies, or maybe saying they've 'shattered' into fragments that inhabit those bodies would be most accurate.

but remember, this is just my memory (which is usually pretty good) and just one rabbi's explanation. it could be an ancient belief or a current one, i'm not sure.

__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer

WillyPete

The problem with scripture, is that if you take it as the express word of Whatever God, then it is only the express word as pertaining to previous circumstances.
In order to cater to modern dilemnas (not that the HS question is modern) you have to use the previous guidance wisely (never happens) or receive new words from god.

Funny how god has stopped asking people to take a memo...

What this leaves us with are people from all differently biased backgrounds, trained in various philosophical and scientific fields and they try and re-translate what has previously been written. This won't work.

To your homosexuality question.
If you take the bible as your sole reference, and you take it's contents LITERALLY, then HS is not permissible.
The form of marriage as proposed in the bible is also very different to what we have now. It's usually a 2 part deal. One is the religious rites and the other is the publicly stated contract between 2 people.

Most gay marriage advocates want the LEGAL benefits. Not necessarily the religious approval. Learn to differentiate the two parts. They want the same benefits that 2 heteros would have if they were together for over a year or married by a licensed marriage officer. Currently they have no legal recourse on one another or their partners estate, etc.
Things to consider before casting your vote on this are:
What happens when one of two honest, law abiding gay people that have been loyal to one another all their lives, dies. Unless they have no heirs from a previous hetero relationship, the state will take all of the one person's estate from the other. All the things they have left to remind them of their loved one.
What happens when one partner stays home or gives up a career to support their partner's career and the supported one goes and leaves them? They have no recourse to the law like a hetero couple. Where is the fairness in that?
What happens when one partner is injured and on life support. If the other wants to keep them on it or in respect their spoken wish incase of this event, turn it off, they have no legal right to this decision.

Consider those aspects.

With regards to the Religious aspect, then there are as many answers as there are religions. If all a gay couple wanted was for them to declare their vows before God and their friends, then they could make their own church. It would still not be legally binding though, but would satisfy a religious need.

martinguerre

The 12th chapter of Daniel is a good point to look...there is a mention of the worthy awakening to reward, and the faithless to punishment. During the reign of Antichus Epihianes (Antichus, the Manifestation of God) the Jews were persecuted quite severely. Read 1 Maccabees 1-5 for a quick overview. Daniel is written in that time period, 168-164 BCE. Due to people constantly being marytred, there needed to be a response.

"Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego answered the king, O*Nebuchadnezzar, we have no need to present a defence to you in this matter. If our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the furnace of blazing fire and out of your hand, O*king, let him deliver us.* But if not, be it known to you, O*king, that we will not serve your gods and we will not worship the golden statue that you have set up. "

Dan 3:16-18

The response is to claim that God's justice can often be outside of visible history, including belief in a paridise reward for the ones who are faithful to the end, even in persecution.

__________________
For God so loved creation, that God sent God's only Son that whosoever believed should not perish, but have everlasting life.

-John 3:16