Timmy Farron and the Bible - can they both be right?

[optionalrationale]

We deserve to know

[squishysquirmy]

FFS.

If I, or anyone else on mumsnet, had the definitive, indisputable answer on the veracity of the bible, and on which way it should be interpreted, we probably wouldn't be spending our Monday afternoons browsing an internet forum. We would be too busy bringing about world peace, what with being the mouthpiece of an omniscient, omnipotent deity and all.

[optionalrationale]

Temper!
Either Timmy is right (about gay sex no longer not being a sin) or the Bible is. It's binary.

[squishysquirmy]

I felt a bit sorry for you as your thread was being ignored by everyone else. Especially as you feel so strongly that "you deserve to know!"
I think there's a philosophy and religion topic you could get this moved to? You might get more people responding there, because posting here makes your question look like a goady reference to a complete non-story which was resolved days ago.
Unless you want to discuss the role of religion in politics, and whether you think that the two should be more/less separate? Are a candidate's private religious beliefs more important than their voting record and policies?
Have you checked out the other stuff Leviticus prohibits?
What about the sin of wearing leather trousers with a linen/woolen blend top?
May and the bible can't both be right!

[optionalrationale]

Resolved?

[SoloD]

Why would a Almighty God care about two people who love each other having sex? I mean He was not bothered about the Holocaust? The Rwanda genocide.. fine. But two men getting it on?

Very odd priorities.

[OddBoots]

Remind me, what does the bible say Jesus himself preached about homosexuality?

[Strawberrybubblebath]

Jesus never said anything about homosexuality. Gay people are very welcome in the church. We have gay clergy and worshippers. Certainly there are some Christians who are against gay people getting married in church and that is wrong (recently the bishops voted in favour of them bring allowed to marry in church but the lower house voted against).
However there are also some aethiests who are anti gay too. I also tend to find its aethiests who seem to keep bringing this issue up with often inaccurate views about the reality of what most Christians think on the issue. I am not a Catholic but I believe the Pope has recently spoken in support of gay people and not standing in their way if they should wish to know Jesus.
You can of course find "evidence" to support whatever you like on the Internet but that never beats actually speaking to real life people or visiting an actual church and talking to the clergy there.

[Strawberrybubblebath]

Solo I think God was very bothered by the Holocaust and Rwanda genocide and I think he remains very bothered by all the atrocities that still go on. Sometimes I think I would like to ask him why he no longer intervenes in the troubles of our world but I fear he might ask me the same thing.

[lovecreameggs]

God collar by Marcus bridgestock is excellent in this regard. I recommend you read it. He has a good section where he discusses his confusion about why certain Christians are obsessed with 'what the gays are doing'

[optionalrationale]

Surely the best answer for any British politician is
"My faith is private"

[squishysquirmy]

Well yes, optional. But only if that answer gets widely reported.
Tim Farron:
“People’s faith is private, and it’s up to them to decide how they make these interpretations. For me, separating faith from politics means you shouldn’t be trying to have a running commentary on these things, and also shouldn’t be trying to impose one’s beliefs on others.”

www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/25/tim-farron-says-he-doesnt-believe-gay-sex-is-a-sin

[optionalrationale]

So which is right? Timmy or the Bible?

[squishysquirmy]

Ahh, the age old problem of the inflexibility of the written language, and the inherent danger in taking translated texts many thousands of years old, based on an an even older oral tradition, out of context, and then interpreting them over literally.

Socrates or Proust - can they both be right? We deserve to know!

[Mymothersdaughter]

It's not binary. Faith is a huge spectrum, views of the infallibility of the bible are a spectrum, personal opinions are a spectrum. There are loads of similar issues: sex before marriage, divorce, abortion, women in leadership etc etc. Different Christians will have different opinions. They are all grey areas. We are not God, we do not know the mind of God. IMO you've got to work these things out for yourself and it's up to you to decide where you align yourself on the grey issues. Then I think it should be your decision whether you share those views and people should not be forced to do so.

[optionalrationale]

I don't remember Socrates or Proust ever claiming to be the inerrant word of an omniscient and omnipotent diety

[optionalrationale]

Mymothersdaughter
Is the Bible "pick and choose"?

[squishysquirmy]

"I don't remember Socrates or Proust ever claiming to be the inerrant word of an omniscient and omnipotent diety"
Neither did Farron.

Socrates and Proust both had very strong opinion on literacy, and some of Socrates' reservations are very relevant to your question (if it was a genuine one).

[Epipgab]

If you think politicians' faith should be private (which it often is until someone sees them attending a place of worship and insists they answer lots of questions), why does it matter to you? Are you writing an essay or article perhaps, or trying to catch people out? Why are you writing very short answers trying to get everyone else to explain their views but not doing so yourself?

Does either of your options have to be "right" unless you're a fundamentalist who takes the entire Bible literally and out of its historical context? Have you considered the vast amount of work done by scholars to translate the Bible as accurately as possible, going back to its source materials and including words or phrases which could be ambiguous? Why do you think all mysteries must be solved in this life?

Why not begin instead with the message of Jesus in the gospels (love for God and our neighbour, not judging one another, and rejecting the hypocritical approach from those who believe they do everything "right" but do not have a loving heart) and working from there?

[optionalrationale]

Options
A) Bumsex is a siny
B) Bumsex is not a sin

Bible says A. Timmy says B.

So options

1. Bible is right. Timmy is wrong
   
2. Timmy is right (now).Bible is wrong.
   

Any other possibilities?

PS I think 2

[Epipgab]

1. Bible does not actually say gay sex is a sin. Tim Farron is right (for once).

[optionalrationale]

What does it say? About bumsex?

[Mymothersdaughter]

The bible isn't pick and choose. But the trinity is the Father, Son and Holy Spirit not the Father, Son and the Bible. Faith and belief is about a living, breathing, real-life doctrine inspired by the spirit not a life and belief system constrained by age-old interpretations of contextual literature. The bible says all scripture is God-breathed- God continues to breathe new life into scripture now and always through new understandings and Spirit-led reading. If I wrote you a manual for how to live your life when you were 15 it wouldn't all be perfectly transferable to a 50 year old you but many of the principles behind it would still be applicable and ageless. Context makes a huge difference. It's not humanely possible to follow scripture to the letter and avoid any picking and choosing, we all have to do the best we can and have the right heart about how we live our lives.

Anyway, not going to keep arguing the point as your posts are troll-y but all I'll say is if you think being gay equates to 'bumsex' then you are on the wrong planet. The whole issue isn't about genitalia but about how the church is supposed to respond to two people in love who, aside from having similar genitalia, are very much like any other couple and in a lot of people's eyes deserve the same level of respect as any straight couple. Whether you agree with TF's theological views or not, the question isn't really about sex at all but about whether he believes in inclusivity and equal rights.

If you're not a troll and genuinely need to work out the answer to this for yourself then there are plenty of books and articles discussing the point. I can't imagine living inside a mind where there is no room for grey areas or for bringing real-life emotive issues into logical debates about right verses wrong. So best wishes to you as you continue on your journey.

[optionalrationale]

Why did it take Timmy so long?

[optionalrationale]

"The bible says all scripture is God-breathed-"
Who decides what is scripture and what isn't?
If God knew his scripture was going to be misinterpreted by man for so long, why didn't he clarify things sooner? You know, before the murder and persecution of millions of people for being witches, Sodomites etc etc

[squishysquirmy]

To all those taking the time to write considered, long, reflective posts that address optional's question in good faith:
She has started a few threads like this. Not normally about the bible, but normally involving what she thinks is an oh-so-cunning trap for remainers, or left leaning politicians. At least one of these threads have been deleted by MNHQ. She likes to ask simplistic questions, and does not much care for nuance. She demands answers, but is baffled by concepts that can't be summed up in more than three words.