Hey,
Don't want to agree or disagree with anyone in this forum, but wanted to put in my 2 cents worth about the Old Testament.
Heard a great sermon on Sunday about The New Testament interpreting the Old Testament for Christians. I.e. the principles of the OT still stand but you should read them through NT.

So in the Torah it talks a lot about animal sacrifice. Can't remember the last time I saw animal sacrifice at a church service. That's because Jesus is expressly stated in the Gospels and elsewhere in the Bible as the "Lamb of God" (who takes away the sins of the world). So the idea of the sacrifical lamb remains, its just not a literal animal anymore.

People talk about the Sabbath- which is expressly stated as a Commandment. But Jesus said He was Lord of the Sabbath. Also, in Romans, Paul talks about some people considering one day especially holy, and others considering every day holy. What is important is that every man has his own conscience about it, and respects each other's decision. (I.e. if you want to be a SDA and keep Saturday as the Sabbath, cool, if not, cool too. Just respect each other.)

In regards to sexuality, Jesus was talking to 1st Century Jewish people who had the Old Testament as their guide on what constituted sexual morality (no fornication, adultery, beastiality, homosexuality, rape or incest). When he spoke about sexual sins (and when other writers in the NT spoke about sexual sins) there was no abrogation of any of the above. They all still stand as sin in God's eyes.

Some will then say, should adulterers/homosexuals/etc. be under the death penalty? In response to that, one Christian friend of mine said "actually we're all under the [eternal] death penalty... that's why we needed Jesus to save us." But I think a clear NT interpretation would be found in the story of the woman caught in adultery. Jesus said to the people who wanted to stone her "you who are without sin, be the first to cast a stone". The elderly left first (perhaps more in tune with their sinfulness?) but eventually everyone left but Jesus. "Where are you condemners?" He asked. "They have gone" she said. "Then neither do I condemn you. Go now and leave your life of sin."

The point I'm arguing is that the Christian view of immoral sexual behaviour should be to define it as the OT did, as was supported through the NT, however to "punish" it in the same way Jesus did- to forgive the person and exhort them to "leave their life of sin."

Now if you're a non-Christian you probably couldn't care less about Christians telling you to "leave your life of sin". However, you must understand that this principle, when coming from a spirit of gentleness and love as Jesus did with the woman caught in adultery, is not in itself homophobia. I would of course however argue, that those Aussies who hate and would violently attack homosexuals on the basis of their homosexuality are homophobic.

I hope that's helped to clarify some aspects of the conservative Christian voice on this issue.

PS from Carol. Have retrospectively discovered that Rodney Croome made some very similar points to those in my article in his blog, see http://www.rodneycroome.id.au/comments?id=2271_0_1_0_C

If Rudd is the future of Labor, heaven help us!

The Greens look better and better all the time...

I happen to agree, to an extent, with the conclusion reached at the end of this post. The culture wars are not the media smoke screen that many say we would do well to ignore in our pursuit of more important matters.

In an age of almost inevitable economic prosperity, where natural resources and a borrowing against equity rather than any real economic development leverage the economy, the culture wars are the predominant field of battle.

Interest rates and inflation have only recently been resurrected from the issue graveyard. Howard and the coalition have consistently been winning skirmishes by identifying and playing on who we think we are and who we suspect could be against us.

Federal politics has, in the last decade, been the meeting point for global trends and events and oppositional weakness. State politics has seen an almost identical situation – non-existent or ineffectual oppositions unable to capitalise on gross mismanagement.

Kevin Rudd could be one of the few labour politicians able to compete with his coalition counterparts. His choice of subjects could be an affirmation that he has not disregarded the culture wars altogether as an important arena of intellectual contest, but his other comments that the culture wars are a “clever wedge”, if not currently accurate, could soon hit the mark.

The economic and geopolitical game is quickly approaching a precipice that won’t be flashes in the pan like detention centres or Tampa or even AWB – to exclude the outsider and to forgive agriculture in this country almost anything because it is somehow Australian has a long history.

I suspect we will soon see a global maelstrom that is not new or unique or cataclysmic, but it will definitely remind us that our memories become a little too short during periods of economic prosperity.

Of course it’s homophobia, YNLI.

All kinds of things which were not acceptable in the old testament are now OK for christians, such as eating shellfish, and sex during menstruation. All kinds of difference are accommodated in the christian religions – left-handedness, red hair and racial differences are a few examples. However the christian religions have decided arbitrarily to retain intolerance of just one difference – sexuality.

Young people growing up in a church who find they are attracted to the same sex, discover at the same time the christian value of loving one’s neighbour doesn’t extend to them. Typically they are forced out of their community of faith, http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=4664 Often they are required to make a choice between their (god-given) sexuality and their religion, their social networks and sometimes their livelihoods.

Yes, bashing and abusing same-sex-attracted people is homophobia. However the reason this happens is because you and others think that one rule for straight people and another rule for gays is OK. This is the foundation of homophobia, the justification that simple-minded bigots with baseball bats use for going after gays.

All of us are damaged by the existence of homophobia among us, and just because you’re not wielding a bat yourself doesn’t relieve you of complicity in the crime.