What the Bible Says/Doesn't Say About Homosexualit

---

(Title for cut off by one word grr lol)Stumbled across this article this afternoon and it was a very informative read. Its kind of lengthy but I encourage everyone to take the time and actually read it in its entirety.Because its quite long I am just going to post a link to the article.http://www.soulforce.org/article/homosexuality-bible-gay-christianThe author raised a lot of points I personally never thought of.

The first premise is incorrect in its assumption and, therefor, the premises that follow it do not apply. The first premise cited:"Most people have not carefully and prayerfully researched the biblical texts often used to condemn God's lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender children."Most? Where does he get his stats? No reference is given. Anyway, he creates a strawman argument, for it is the homosexual act and not the person the Bible condemns. Liberals go to great mental strains to be unable to differenciate between the person and the behavior...they are indeed two different things.There's nothing wrong with being gay, Biblically speaking...but there is something wrong with gay sex. The Bible is clear on this.Just for you Eddie...since you're always saying only the Old Testament refers to homosexuality. I bothered to look it up since, for some strange reason, you're not interested in looking it up for yourself. I don't know what religios doctrines you hold to, but mine don't allow me to pick and choose what to believe. I don't consider myself smarter, or more "enlightened" than God...do you?Romans 1[21] Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations [Wow...sounds like liberals!], and their foolish heart was darkened.[22] Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,[23] And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.[24] Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:[25] Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.[26] For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:[27] And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.[28] And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;[29] Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,[30] Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,[31] Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:[32] Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.That last line [32] reminds me of folks in another thread trying to convince a Christian it's OK to have sex outside of marriage. Something like "If it happens it's no big deal"...or "Hey, it's natural, it's even good for you!"...and other similar words to that effect. Misery loves company I guess.

sounds like liberalslolas we have already established, you were born and live as a liberal so just drop it.All the sex in your quoted text is, if anything, implied. If it was so important, couldn't god be a bit more clear?Anyway, as you know, your interpretation of the bible is not in agreement with very many scholars, theologians and clergy. Therefore, your interpretation cannot be absolute, Unless you profess yourself to be wise and become a fool.  Quote:That last line [32] reminds me of folks in another thread trying to convince a Christian it's OK to have sex outside of marriage.... Misery loves company I guess. Well, if you'd just shut up and let the homos get married, that would be one less thing for you to worry about!not to mention, I would be miserable WITHOUT the company I have in my bed (you're just jealous)

Thor, looks like you need to re-read the article, because the babble you just posted goes to the very things he was talking about.

If you would actual read it with an open mind you might actually learn something.

Quote:The first premise is incorrect in its assumption and, therefor, the premises that follow it do not apply.Who says so?I do think he was wrong to use the word 'premise'. A premise is where you start from. What he calls premises are really theses. Quote:it is the homosexual act and not the person the Bible condemnsI can agree with that, but the writer has obviously come across many people who don't make that distinction.But tell me, thor - the Bible condemns widely and frequently adultery and fornication - far more often than homosexual acts. I'm not saying the conservative churches approve of these - but they do not seem to condemn their practice with the vigour they condemn homosexual practices. I do not see protesters with signs saying that fornicators are going to hell outside college dorms. I don't see suggestions that all fornicators should be put to death. Why?

Originally Posted By: NtroducingMyself(Title for cut off by one word grr lol)Stumbled across this article this afternoon and it was a very informative read. Its kind of lengthy but I encourage everyone to take the time and actually read it in its entirety.Because its quite long I am just going to post a link to the article.http://www.soulforce.org/article/homosexuality-bible-gay-christianThe author raised a lot of points I personally never thought of. My question is why follow a book that even has an issue with this topic in the first place?

Quote:

the Bible condemns widely and frequently adultery and fornication - far more often than homosexual acts

that's a good point, thanks

what I've found, and I'm not alone in the observation, is that the bible contains a fairly consistent CULTURAL condemnation of non-reproductive sex.
Many of the exact same passages are used to condemn masturbation and birth control as homosexuality. Correct me if I'm wrong, but non of those three practices are named directly.

Originally Posted By: IneligibleBut tell me, thor - the Bible condemns widely and frequently adultery and fornication - far more often than homosexual acts.Don't forget that the homosexual act is simply a specific kind of fornication...or adultry, if at least one of the parties is married. They know that...and I'm surprised you didn't. Why do you think marriage is so important to them? It opens the door to Christian validation of their "relationship" (or so they're fooling themselves). Quote:I'm not saying the conservative churches approve of these - but they do not seem to condemn their practice with the vigour they condemn homosexual practices.Ya think? Probably because you don't have groups of adulterers and fornicators banding together and trying to force their ideas down societies proverbial throat. Get the church to accept openly practicing adulters...that sort of thing. I think (or at least hope) you get the picture. This also answers, at least in part, the rest of your "questions".

Originally Posted By: NtroducingMyselfThor, looks like you need to re-read the article...It looks like you need to re-read the Bible.

YOU re read ittell me where homosexual sex is specifically condemneddo it now!Then tell me, specifically, where the "new law" allowed the eating of pork and shrimp, yet still condemned sex acts that you find distastefulIf you can't explain this all now, in plain and obvious terms, you must accept that your religion is invalid.OR, you can simply admit that you are a man of faith and stop telling other men and women of faith that they are wrong.What is your choice?

Originally Posted By: unsupervisedYOU re read ittell me where homosexual sex is specifically condemneddo it now!Then tell me, specifically, where the "new law" allowed the eating of pork and shrimp, yet still condemned sex acts that you find distastefulIf you had asked politely, I would have done it. As it is, you can go find the references yourself. But I will point out that the answer to your first question is in the second post of this thread...right in front of your eyes. Quote:If you can't explain this all now, in plain and obvious terms, you must accept that your religion is invalid.OR, you can simply admit that you are a man of faith and stop telling other men and women of faith that they are wrong.What is your choice? Tsk-tsk. You still can't quit trying to make decisions for me and tell me what I must and must not do. Sounds to me like you're the biggest violator of your own precepts.

Quote: Don't forget that the homosexual act is simply a specific kind of fornication...or adultry, if at least one of the parties is married.Homosexuals are not the only people that fornicate, so why isn't the church as harsh on them as they are on Homosexuals. As for adultry, adultry is primarily a heterosexual issues since Homosexuals cannot be married. So don't try and push your adultry BS on homosexuals.  Quote: Get the church to accept openly practicing adulters...that sort of thingHomosexuals are not adulters... do you need the definition?Definition: Voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and a partner other than the lawful spouse.Last I checked, in the majority of the United States, Homosexuals cannot marry. Now I am not saying that there might not be the instances where a married man or woman might not commit adultry with someone of the same gender. But to say Homosexuals are trying to get the church to openly accept adultry is absolutely BS and you know it. Quote:If you had asked politely, I would have done it Omg are you serious? That has to be the most immature and childish response. Lets be really honest here, if you had the answers you would be more than happy to give them. There was a moment near the end of the article that really brought it home for me: Quote: The Pope said something we must never forget: "Recent historical studies enable us to state that this sad misunderstanding now belongs to the past." Unfortunately, the apology came too late to relieve Galileo of his suffering. What if the biblical scholars of Galileo's day had said to Galileo, "We don't agree with your Copernican theories, but we love and trust you. As long as you love God and seek God's will in your life, you are welcome here."Imagine the suffering that could be avoided if the church could say this to their lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender children: "We don't understand your views about sexual orientation, but we love and trust you. As long as you love God and seek God's will in your life, you are welcome here." As Christian is this not how we are supposed to live our lives? We are to leave the judging up to God, for in the end he will have the final say. Not you, not me, nor the Pope in Rome.

Originally Posted By: NtroducingMyself Quote: Don't forget that the homosexual act is simply a specific kind of fornication...or adultry, if at least one of the parties is married.Homosexuals are not the only people that fornicate, so why isn't the church as harsh on them as they are on Homosexuals. As for adultry, adultry is primarily a heterosexual issues since Homosexuals cannot be married. So don't try and push your adultry BS on homosexuals.  Quote: Quote: Get the church to accept openly practicing adulters...that sort of thingHomosexuals are not adulters... do you need the definition?Definition: Voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and a partner other than the lawful spouse.Last I checked, in the majority of the United States, Homosexuals cannot marry. Now I am not saying that there might not be the instances where a married man or woman might not commit adultry with someone of the same gender. But to say Homosexuals are trying to get the church to openly accept adultry is absolutely BS and you know it.In short, plenty of homosexuals are married to women and have children...only to have affairs with men on the side. Don't plead ignorance to this fact...you are well aware of it. As for church, there are no groups of adulterers/fornicaters infiltrating our schools and legislature to con folks into accepting such practices as acceptable. The same cannot be said of homosexuality. Get it? If there were such groups, I'm sure the church would be at least as outspoken against them as they are about the Homo-Agenda.I really wish you'd actually bother to read my entire posts and ask questions about what you don't understand. Either that, or quit taking things out of context to the point where they mean nothing like they did when in context. Your responses to what I wrote are so far removed from the original progression of thought that addressing them turns into simply re-stating the same thing over and over again. Quote: Quote:If you had asked politely, I would have done it Omg are you serious? That has to be the most immature and childish response. Lets be really honest here, if you had the answers you would be more than happy to give them. And you're just about the last person on this board to talk to anybody about childish behavior. Your response above to what I wrote to somebody else is a perfect example of this.

Quote:In short, plenty of homosexuals are married to women and have children...only to have affairs with men on the side. Don't plead ignorance to this fact...you are well aware of it. I think "plenty" is a bit extreme, but yes there are some. And yes I am aware of this, did you miss the part where I said that myself? But to claim that homosexuals are trying to make the church accept adultery is absolutely BS, and you know it. Homosexuals are no different than heterosexuals when it comes to adultery; in majority we don't like it. Are there some that don't care? Absolutely, but the same can be said about heterosexuals.But if you are going to use the word adultery, than use it in the correct context. Adultery refers to married persons having sex outside their marriage. Adultery is primarily a heterosexual issue, so if you have problems with adultery take it up with the heterosexuals, not the homosexual community.  Quote: The same cannot be said of homosexuality. quote]Being tolerance of someone that is different, even if it’s against your belief, is not the same as acceptance. I have said this many times, I could careless if you or the Church accept me. I'm not in this for acceptance (because your acceptance is not needed or wanted), I am here for Equality. And I can tell you the majority of homosexuals feel the same way I do. [quote]quit taking things out of context to the point where they mean nothing like they did when in context. Follow by example and maybe people will follow suit.  Quote: And you're just about the last person on this board to talk to anybody about childish behavior. Your response above to what I wrote to somebody else is a perfect example of this. "I know you are but what am I".. That’s pretty much what you meant, right?

Originally Posted By: NtroducingMyself Quote: The same cannot be said of homosexuality. Being tolerance of someone that is different, even if it’s against your belief, is not the same as acceptance. I have said this many times, I could careless if you or the Church accept me. I'm not in this for acceptance (because your acceptance is not needed or wanted), I am here for Equality. And I can tell you the majority of homosexuals feel the same way I do.And yet once again, you're stuck because you don't understand, or can't accept, that there is a difference between a homosexual and homosexuality. The first is a person...the second a behavior. The church accepts the person...and does NOT accept the behavior (for reasons indicated in post #2, as well as a host of others found in the Bible). Nobody is perfect, but there is a difference between doing something wrong and accepting that it is wrong and trying to change, and denying that something is wrong and trying to champion that it is actually right. Doing the latter will get you kicked out of many a church real fast...and rightly so. This does not mean the people don't accept you as a person...it means that your behavior is not to be tolerated.As for equality, you are, regardless of how you choose to see it, effectively asking for the church to accept gay marriage...soemthing that is not up to them. That belongs to God, and He has already stated what a marriage is in the Bible. The church is simply following the Bible in the matter. You are trying to make yourself into God and attempting to convince people that it is up to them to determine what marriage is. Go back and read Romans 1 until it sinks in.

Originally Posted By: thorIf you had asked politely, I would have done it. As it is, you can go find the references yourself. But I will point out that the answer to your first question is in the second post of this thread...right in front of your eyes.Tsk-tsk. You still can't quit trying to make decisions for me and tell me what I must and must not do. Sounds to me like you're the biggest violator of your own precepts. sure, keep making excuses rather than answering questions to which you have no answer. This, I've come to expect and accept.I'm not telling anyone what to do as I am not a member the dictatorial version of any religion or political system.I am merely an observerthor, I wish you could see the world through my eyes, just for a moment. It's a wondrous place. A universe of diversity and possibility beyond the scope of any creation myth. And here, on our little planet, a dominant species capable of good and evil, love and hate... and arrogance.it's fascinatingI also wish you could read the bible as I do, without precepts of it's meaning. There is a lot to be learned about civilization in the bible but a closed mind does a deep disrespect to its authors.I'm not to sure what you think faith is but i can tell you that it's a journey, not a destination. It's a process of learning and enlightenment. The more I learn, the more my belief system becomes enriched and complex. For this, I am grateful, yet still sad for those who cannot grow with me.

Originally Posted By: unsupervisedsure, keep making excuses rather than answering questions to which you have no answer. This, I've come to expect and accept.I have an answer...and if you had asked nicely instead of like some dictatorial tyrant that had powers over the lives of others, I'd have given it to you. No such luck. Quote:The more I learn, the more my belief system becomes enriched and complex. For this, I am grateful, yet still sad for those who cannot grow with me. We all are equal, but we start our spiritual walk from different locations. As a result, each of our walks is uniquely our own. Some of what you learn another may have been born knowing, and so forth. Don't expect your learnings to be as enlightening to others as you initially think they might be...others may be way ahead of you. Christ and the Bible denote the direction...and if your path conflicts with them, you are going astray. It sometimes helps to have others around that can help point it out to you. Again, we are imperfect...and we don't catch everything by ourselves. But I have to disagree with you in that, as you grow spiritually, things become more simple...not more complex. Perhaps the understanding becomes more complex...but it's not something human beings are capable of grasping completely anyway.

Quote: The church accepts the person...and does NOT accept the behaviorThey do? Than why are many homosexuals asked to leave Churches? I (and I know other gay Christians) have been told we are not Christians because we are gay. There is sadly still plenty of "Christians" who feel its okay to kill gay people. So don't talk to me about what the Church accepts and what they don't because you have absolutely no idea, or like many other people turn a blind eye because it don't personally affect you.  Quote:The church is simply following the Bible in the matter. So the church gets to pick and choose what it follows. This is essentially what you are telling me. What about all the other scriptures that the church has decided not to continue to follow? Shouldn't we still follow all those scruptures as well? Please show me where God states its okay to ignore those but not the views on homosexuality? Let me make it easy, there is no such thing.Sexuality was not something that was understood back than, so the laws, to them, made sense to the time. But in todays science and education, those same laws do not make sense. Just as the laws of not eating sea food, avoiding anything made form pig skin etc. no longer makes sense today.

Originally Posted By: NtroducingMyself

Quote:

The church accepts the person...and does NOT accept the behavior

They do? Than why are many homosexuals asked to leave Churches? I (and I know other gay Christians) have been told we are not Christians because we are gay.

In my view, it would only be correct to ask practicing homosexuals to leave...not because they're gay, but because of their behavior. I explained the person/behavior concept in my post above.

Quote:

Quote:

The church is simply following the Bible in the matter.

So the church gets to pick and choose what it follows. This is essentially what you are telling me. What about all the other scriptures that the church has decided not to continue to follow? Shouldn't we still follow all those scruptures as well? Please show me where God states its okay to ignore those but not the views on homosexuality? Let me make it easy, there is no such thing.

To put it bluntly, your knowledge of the Bible sucks.

1Timothy 4
[4] For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
[5] For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

The key is that it must be received with thanksgiving.

Quote:

Sexuality was not something that was understood back than, so the laws, to them, made sense to the time. But in todays science and education, those same laws do not make sense. Just as the laws of not eating sea food, avoiding anything made form pig skin etc. no longer makes sense today.

Ah...I see...so now it's you and not the church that is doing the picking and choosing. Pot, meet Kettle...Kettle, Pot. And folks were not ignorant of sexuality back then as you suggest. It's not exactly rocket science.

Quote:In my view, it would only be correct to ask practicing homosexuals to leave...not because they're gay, but because of their behavior. I explained the person/behavior concept in my post above. So its okay to deny homosexuals a place to worship? Interesting, but not a surprise an arrogant person like yourself would think its okay to turn away Gods Children. Its not the Churches business what I do in my personal life, I am there to worshop God, THAT'S what they should be concerned about.  Quote: To put it bluntly, your knowledge of the Bible sucks.Well to put it bluntly, so does yours. You pick and choose what fits your agenda but ignore everything else. Plus, I never once made the claim that I was all knowledgeable when it comes to the bible. I'm human and I have my faults, and I am always willing to learn. Something I cannot say for you.  Quote:Timothy 4[4] For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:[5] For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.The key is that it must be received with thanksgiving. Show me where God said said all the past scriptures, expect the ones direct towards homosexuals, have been forgiven and lifted from law? I am still waiting.  Quote:And folks were not ignorant of sexuality back then as you suggest. It's not exactly rocket science. You obviously did not read the article fully, or you'd have your answer to this. He has a whole section devoted to this topic. They did not understand sexuality, and though it might not be "rock science", there is science behind sexuality. The fact they had no idea how a child was conceieved speaks volumes to their knowledge of sexuality.