Tim Thomas Stands with Chick-Fil-A (i.e. against gay marriage)

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by gpflamesfan

You are right I probably shouldn't have referenced the old testament law that was for the nation of Israel. The death of Jesus freed them from the law and opened the door so gentiles can be saved.

Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God. For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code.
-Romans 7:4-6 (ESV)

I'm a pretty spiritual person, grew up in a very religious family, and I still hold a lot of those beliefs close to my heart.

That said: if homosexuality was such a major issue, why did Jesus never say anything, at all, on the topic? Christianity is based on the teachings of Jesus, and never in the gospels did Jesus say anything at all about homosexuality.

[zamler]

Do you know how hard it is to make the world in 6 days before days even existed? Yea, pretty hard. So anyway, I can't understand how a guy like Thomas can be such a great goaltender, and such a weirdo off the ice. Shakes my belief in hockey to an extent.

But Iginla is my god, so honestly I am not too concerned about the whole matter.

[handgroen]

Originally Posted by FlyingDonutz

“‘And you must not lie down with a male+ the same as you lie down with a woman.+ It is a detestable thing.

That's the proper translation.... not to be arrogant.

Anyways.

it's not that you seem arrogant, but let's not argue about who's memorized the real magic words

[Savvy27]

Honestly, I would love to sit down and have a beer and a debate with Iginla. From everything I've gathered over the years, it seems that he is a fierce debater who was influenced to some extent by his lawyer father, yet he is a devout Christian. I am ecstatic that he does not announce his views publicly, but it would be cool to hear what he thinks about the world.

[kirant]

Originally Posted by Psytic

I think the bible is a crock. It has been changed so many times I highly doubt it is the word of "God" at all. To many contradictions in it, even between the Old and New Testament which I won't get into here.

Between numerous dubious translations in history, the natural ambiguity of changing language over time, and the confusing contradictions, it's tough to say how much, if there is legitimacy in the Bible, actually can be interpreted properly these days.

[zamler]

This thread should be in off topic. So in that spirit, I'll just leave this here.

Don't click if you are Tim Thomas, or if you are religious. Or easily offended. Or if you are a moderator.

Spoiler!

[FlyingDonutz]

Originally Posted by bigpete

You guys know that like 50% of Americans don't support gay marriage, right?

You know that a lot of americans are ignorant, arrogant, useless, and quite frankly just tick everyone else off? Yeah...

Ugh.. lets get back to hockey.. this thread is gonna cause some serious crap.

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Originally Posted by wittynickname

That said: if homosexuality was such a major issue, why did Jesus never say anything, at all, on the topic? Christianity is based on the teachings of Jesus, and never in the gospels did Jesus say anything at all about homosexuality.

But Leviticus did. The same Leviticus that says that you can buy slaves. And that shellfish is also an abomination.

[Meers]

Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat

But Leviticus did. The same Leviticus that says that you can buy slaves. And that shellfish is also an abomination.

And tattoos! If Thomas and Chik-fil-A had any consistency in their religious beliefs, they would oppose people with tats eating chicken sandwiches.

[zamler]

Who's going to stand up for the chickens? That's what is being lost in all of this.

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Tim Thomas is standing for the 1st amendment.

The background to the story is that a Chicago alderman, with the support of Rahm Emanuel, is considering banning Chick Fil-A from opening a business in his district, because the owner (who is Christian) supports the biblical definition of marriage.

Yup ....hockey is the furthest thing from the mind of Tim Thomas though....

It goes a little beyond "supports the biblical definition". As a company they're actively campaigning and spending considerable money to deny people equality.

[trackercowe]

It's hard to believe any team will be desperate enough to sign Thomas next season. What an idiot, I know he's allowed free expression, but why do it at the expense of his career? I doubt he even will get some sort of coaching or scouting job after he retires. No team will want to risk attaching themselves to someone who might spout off, or make a stupid decision at any moment.

Just plain stupidity on Thomas' behalf.

[calumniate]

News: Tim Thomas signs a multi-year gay contract with the Vancouver Canucks!

[MikaelBacklund]

What happend to Thomas?... I thought the guy was classy since he respectfully ignored all the drama and luongo's comments on him during their cup run, but woooow does it ever seem that he's a dick.
It must suck being one of his teammates and putting up with all the questions they face about their buddies actions.

[FlyingDonutz]

Originally Posted by MikaelBacklund

What happend to Thomas?... I thought the guy was classy since he respectfully ignored all the drama and luongo's comments on him during their cup run, but woooow does it ever seem that he's a dick.
It must suck being one of his teammates and putting up with all the questions they face about their buddies actions.

It is just his opinion. But I thought he was a class act. Not anymore. Hopefully he wastes a crapload of money on this then gets moved to canada
XD

[Psytic]

Originally Posted by FlyingDonutz

It is just his opinion. But I thought he was a class act. Not anymore. Hopefully he wastes a crapload of money on this then gets moved to canada
XD

Hopefully he just isn't asked back after his mini retirement or what ever is going on with him. I don't mind that he has an opinion but he should keep it to him self, he is a PR nightmare for the Bruins.

[Textcritic]

So, I went ahead and moved this thread to the Off Topic Forum since the subject matter is veering dangerously off course from Tim Thomas, but mostly so that I could properly address some of the suspiciously sounding myopic biblical literalists that appear to be emerging from the woodwork:

Originally Posted by FlyingDonutz

...The bible also teaches us to respect our fellow man no matter his belief. But I guess he didn't get past Genesis.

This is actually quite frustrating... it really is.

It does? I suppose it might in some isolated places, and in accordance with our fairly distorted post-modern tendencies, but there are at least as many places in which "the Bible" condones marginalization and the entire obliteration of whole races of people for the capital crime of being different. Furthermore, while the Pauline epistles seem generally concerned with what one "believes", this is a minority view in "the Bible" for the most part, which evaluates humanity more according to ethics and behaviour.

I use "the Bible" here in scare-quotes deliberately, and to make an important point: "The Bible" is not a single, coherent document, but rather a fairly eclectic collection of various Jewish religious texts that were written, edited and compiled over hundreds of years. For this reason, it is usually quite difficult to find much of anything in which "the Bible" presents a consistent viewpoint.

Originally Posted by FlyingDonutz

Genesis 1:27, 28

What does this passage have to do with marriage?

Originally Posted by FlyingDonutz

Genesis 2:22-24

This more appropriately provides a working definition for marriage, but it is still pretty vague. In the first place, in accordance with the context for the story, the creation of woman is presented as a solution to the dilemma that the man is unable to find a suitable (sexual?) companion from among the animals. Right away, that nugget of information ought to tell you about what kind of story this is here, and it really is a solid clue that we should probably not use this text to form our own ideas about how marriage "ought" to be defined.

Originally Posted by FlyingDonutz

Matthew 19: 4-9

Jesus's teaching here has nothing to do with homosexuality, but is rather offered to address polygamy. The social context in Palestine at the time probably explains why Jesus is silent on the issue, and why this was deemed a more pressing matter than homosexual relationships. Furthermore, homosexuality in the Ancient Near East was considerably different than how it has developed in today's society. So much so that most of what the Bible says about it is completely irrelevant.

Originally Posted by FlyingDonutz

“‘And you must not lie down with a male+ the same as you lie down with a woman.+ It is a detestable thing.

That's the proper translation.... not to be arrogant.

Honestly? Why did you bother? Your "corrected" translation is little better than hair-splitting, and the fact that you bothered to suggest an alternative makes you appear pretentious and imperious.

What is your understanding of the difference in the semantic range between "abomination" and "detestable thing"? For my money, the former is actually a better translation than your suggestion, given the highly sensitive nature of the Hebrew term תועבה, which almost universally is used to indicate some sort of cultic infidelity. For the ancient Hebrews—as for the early Semitic people and the Mesopotamian cultures more generally—homosexual activity was viewed as an abomination precisely because it defied the sacred, divinely mandated created order, and it was ineffectual to achieve the highest function of intercourse, which was primarly if not entirely regarded as necessary only for the purpose of conception. Inside of the appropriate cultural and religious milieu, "abomination" is actually MUCH better than merely translated the word with "detestable thing".

[badradio]

If Henrik and Daniel want to get married, the more power to them! Oh wait, brothers? Ya sure why not?

[driveway]

It must be difficult to be a social conservative. I can't imagine being on the losing side of almost every social argument. Where have the social conservative 'wins' been? Narcotic prohibition, gun control in the US ... and ... is that it? Maybe the global warming debate is an arguable win right now for the SoCons, but the list of defeats is long:

Women's suffrage - lost, alcohol prohibition - lost, civil rights - lost, prayer in school - lost, evolution taught - lost, educational integration - lost, abortion legal - lost, homosexual rights - losing, prevalence of pornography - lost worse than anyone has ever lost, immigration - losing, multiculturalism - losing.

The tide is even swinging against narcotic prohibition.

It's no wonder Social Conservatives feel the need to dig in their heels and try to hold onto whatever ground they feel they have left. They've lost so badly so many times.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat

And that shellfish is also an abomination.

To be fair, they are.