Does God actually find homosexual relations "abominable"?
Hi, before people give me passages from the Romans, Corrinthians, Leviticus, Exodus or anywhere else, I want to point out that one issue with the word "abomination" appearing in our English-translated bibles.
The Hebrew word for "abomination" and "unclean" both come from the same Hebrew word, To'ebah. Likewise, the same word from which "homosexual offender" was translated from in 1 Cor. 6:9 appears again in 1 Timothy as "pervert".
Considering that it's possible that modern Christians take the words used out of context, due to mistranslation, how do you think God might view homosexuality today? Do you think God views homosexuality the same as eating with "unclean" hands or eating non-Kosher food?
Note: before responding, PLEASE read what I wrote about the translations. Don't just launch into reciting Scripture without at least considering my argument first. God blessed you with a mind and gave you the ability read and think for yourself. If I'm wrong, prove me wrong, if you can't then maybe consider my argument which is Romans 14:12,13
"So then, each of us will give an account of himself to God. Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's way."
Hi, before people give me passages from the Romans, Corrinthians, Leviticus, Exodus or anywhere else, I want to point out that one issue with the word "abomination" appearing in our English-translated bibles.
The Hebrew word for "abomination" and "unclean" both come from the same Hebrew word, To'ebah. Likewise, the same word from which "homosexual offender" was translated from in 1 Cor. 6:9 appears again in 1 Timothy as "pervert".
Considering that it's possible that modern Christians take the words used out of context, due to mistranslation, how do you think God might view homosexuality today? Do you think God views homosexuality the same as eating with "unclean" hands or eating non-Kosher food?
Note: before responding, PLEASE read what I wrote about the translations. Don't just launch into reciting Scripture without at least considering my argument first. God blessed you with a mind and gave you the ability read and think for yourself. If I'm wrong, prove me wrong, if you can't then maybe consider my argument which is Romans 14:12,13
"So then, each of us will give an account of himself to God. Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's way."
I don't see any reason why God would consider it such an abomination. Loving another person is certainly in God's list of greatest commandments. What difference does it make what anatomy they have? Love transcends the physical body, and as evident by the complexity of sexuality and gender identity, it isn't as black and white as the Bible authors understood it to be. There are many people who don't fit neatly into the male vs. female paradigm. They may be physically male, and mentally/emotionally female. They may be more masculine or feminine. They may have organs of both male and female. It's very very complicated. And aside from a few poorly interpreted, out of context verses from an ancient culture, I can't see a logical reason as to why God would oppose a loving, same-sex relationship. Especially if we accept that God made people with an attraction to members of the same-sex.
__________________ "To love another person is to see the face of God."
Sounds like you only want responces from people who approve of homosexuality. I read what you said, I read most of it more than once trying to make sure I understood what you intended.
I don't think God put anything in His word by accident or without cause. If we were to ignore the sins of others and do what felt right that could have been said very easily. But God doesn't want us to have any doubt on certain things, I believe, therefore, this is what He instructed Paul to write for us: 18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
19because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures. 24Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. 26For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 28And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, 30slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; 32and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.
Hi, before people give me passages from the Romans, Corrinthians, Leviticus, Exodus or anywhere else, I want to point out that one issue with the word "abomination" appearing in our English-translated bibles.
First of all you have to show me where God uses the word 'homosexual' in the Bible. When you do that I'll read what you have to say.
__________________ Not all those who wander are lost
First of all you have to show me where God uses the word 'homosexual' in the Bible. When you do that I'll read what you have to say.
Good point, but I find it definde very well in Romans 1. In fact Romans 1 is so specific it seems to make people uncomfortable, they don't respond well to it.
Only five posts in, and already there are several separate issues here.
The OP focused on the translation of "toevah" as "abomination." When the scholars authorized by King James first translated it this way, the word abomination did not have quite as strong a connotation as it does now. Many more modern translations continue to use "abomination, even though it is no longer the best way to translate it. Some do it because the word has become familiar. Others because they have a (perhaps unconscious) bias. A far better translation would be "taboo." This word, borrowed from Polynesian, was not yet well known enough to be available to the Authorized translators. In general, "toevah" referred to a serious breech in ritual or social mores. Moral turpitude, on the other hand, was labbled "zimmah," "wicked."
The Bible includes literally hundred of examples of sexual sins, and sins with a sexual aspect involving persons of opposite sexes, and yet the sex itself is not the sin, it is the adultery or fornication, or the violent sin it is simply one aspect of. The Bible includes maybe as many as four examples of sexual sin or sin with a sexual aspect invoving persons of the same sex. All are clearly actions that would be equally heinous if the persons involved were of opposite sexes. Nowhere does it condemn a person simply because of who he is attracted to. Or give any other reason to condemn homosexuality in general.
Romans 1:26-27 is often quoted out of context, or in the abreviated context of only Romans 1:18-32, rather than in its full context, which would require including, at the very least, the first three veses of chapter 2. I would include all of chapter 2 and the beginning of chapter 3.
Paul did not single out the actions in verses 26-27 as particularly heinous. He did include more detail, but only because he was referencing a well-known passage from Plato. Those in the Roman church who read Plato would recognize the passage and understand that the sin involved was not that it was same-sex, but that it was "Passion," a reckless hedonism that usually leads to addiction. To make sure that they understood the true focus, he did not quote Plato exactly, but added a few details to point away from same-sex and toward addiction. Plato described the addiction as a slavery to "pleasure"; Paul indicates (in three separate clauses) that the sinners were given up to their passions, and that they are (already and continuously) suffering the consequences of their actions. Paul changes the parallel clauses -- Plato contrasts the sinful Passionate sex to the proper Reasoned sex, but Paul compares the (now unnamed) sin of the women to the sexual addiction of the men. And Paul carefully inserts into the passage five words. These words are the five parts, or symptoms, of a sin of Passion. Paul wants to make sure that the focus is on addictive Passion, and not on the same-sex aspect that Plato included as a "dig" based on an ethnic steretype about the men of Crete.
Dear liars paradox. We all know the 10 Commandments, which God gave us. Since God is LOVE, it stands to reason that the Commandments are given to us, because God loves us, and wants our very best. When Jesus came, He gave us 2 Commandments, which contain ALL 10 Commandments which God gave us. 1) Love God with all our hearts, with all our souls, and with all our minds. God made us in His imagine, He wants us as His sons and daughters for all eternity. 2) Love our neighbour, (all others and each other) AS we love ourselves. That is straightforward, and all can understand the meaning of pure and selfless Love. God gave us free will, we can choose to follow His advice, or ignore it, or even go against it. We have Jesus to help and guide us, He paid the price which we could Not pay, He reconciled us to God. To follow Him and His words to us, give us life in abundance on Earth, and life eternal at the end of our earthly life. LOVE is the Key to Heaven, pure love is what our Heavenly Father wants from us. We decide what we do on Earth, and Jesus is the Way back to God, where we came from. ALL of us KNOW REAL LOVE, pure and with no strings attached. We will know what God wants of us, He does not want clever discussions, or excuses, God knows our hearts. He knows whether we try to follow His loving advice, or not. We have years to learn, we have a Saviour to lead us home, we have a wonderful and great God who forgives us when we fall or stumble. Jesus taught us to pray, " Father forgive us, as we forgive others." God will know how seriously we try to become as He wants us to be. I say this humbly and with love, liars paradox. Greetings from Emmy, sister in Christ.
Only five posts in, and already there are several separate issues here.
The OP focused on the translation of "toevah" as "abomination." When the scholars authorized by King James first translated it this way, the word abomination did not have quite as strong a connotation as it does now. Many more modern translations continue to use "abomination, even though it is no longer the best way to translate it. Some do it because the word has become familiar. Others because they have a (perhaps unconscious) bias. A far better translation would be "taboo." This word, borrowed from Polynesian, was not yet well known enough to be available to the Authorized translators. In general, "toevah" referred to a serious breech in ritual or social mores. Moral turpitude, on the other hand, was labbled "zimmah," "wicked."
The Bible includes literally hundred of examples of sexual sins, and sins with a sexual aspect involving persons of opposite sexes, and yet the sex itself is not the sin, it is the adultery or fornication, or the violent sin it is simply one aspect of. The Bible includes maybe as many as four examples of sexual sin or sin with a sexual aspect invoving persons of the same sex. All are clearly actions that would be equally heinous if the persons involved were of opposite sexes. Nowhere does it condemn a person simply because of who he is attracted to. Or give any other reason to condemn homosexuality in general.
Romans 1:26-27 is often quoted out of context, or in the abreviated context of only Romans 1:18-32, rather than in its full context, which would require including, at the very least, the first three veses of chapter 2. I would include all of chapter 2 and the beginning of chapter 3.
Paul did not single out the actions in verses 26-27 as particularly heinous. He did include more detail, but only because he was referencing a well-known passage from Plato. Those in the Roman church who read Plato would recognize the passage and understand that the sin involved was not that it was same-sex, but that it was "Passion," a reckless hedonism that usually leads to addiction. To make sure that they understood the true focus, he did not quote Plato exactly, but added a few details to point away from same-sex and toward addiction. Plato described the addiction as a slavery to "pleasure"; Paul indicates (in three separate clauses) that the sinners were given up to their passions, and that they are (already and continuously) suffering the consequences of their actions. Paul changes the parallel clauses -- Plato contrasts the sinful Passionate sex to the proper Reasoned sex, but Paul compares the (now unnamed) sin of the women to the sexual addiction of the men. And Paul carefully inserts into the passage five words. These words are the five parts, or symptoms, of a sin of Passion. Paul wants to make sure that the focus is on addictive Passion, and not on the same-sex aspect that Plato included as a "dig" based on an ethnic steretype about the men of Crete.
Wow, you read alot more into the Op than I did. I could tell he wanted people to agree that abominable was to harsh a word for the act of homosex, and I don't know if I agree but with all the things God says could happen to those who engage in the act like stoning and being left out of the Book of Life, the harshness of the word should be the least of his worries.
As for your translation of Romans 1, it says the abandoned the natural use of their bodies to seek those of the same sex, but the point I get is they did it because God no longer offered a way out. they wanted it they got it. He let them go because they gave up on Him, the gave up on truth, and they desired impure things, so he allowed them to destroy themselves. That is what I get out of it and that is why people are so uncomfortable with it becasue it fits so well with today. People want to justify all that gives them pleasure, and He will give them over to it.
Your ranting means nothing because it trys to soften words but neglects the point, these actions seperate man from God, and He will not contend with them over it forever.
Your ranting means nothing because it trys to soften words but neglects the point, these actions seperate man from God, and He will not contend with them over it forever.
It is you who neglect the point. Yes, these actions, any of the actions described in verses 18-32, do separate us from God, but once separated, no amount of good deeds can bring us back to Him again
The point is that however sinful you think the persons that Paul describes in chapter 1 and verses 18-32 are, you are no better. I am no better. All have sinned. The wages of sin is death. And nothing we can do can change that.
But Paul's message does not end at verse 32 of chapter 1, but continues into chapter 2: the Good News is that Jesus has provided for us. We can be redeemed by His Grace, undeserved. As long as we try to be "holy enough," keeping parts of the Law, we are doomed to failure. We are especially doomed when we look down on those who keep less of the Law than we do, since we are just as guilty.
But Grace frees us from the downward spiral of failing to follow the Law. Where our natural inclinations continue to lead us on the path to death, the Holy Spirit is at work, because of His grace, transforming us into the persons God chooses to call His saints.
When you stop reading Romans at the end of Chapter 1, you are preaching exactly the lesson Paul is teaching us to avoid.
=OllieFranz;51982925]It is you who neglect the point.
Depends on which point you are trying to address. I am talking about the OP, you are carrying on about the book of Romans.
Yes, these actions, any of the actions described in verses 18-32, do separate us from God, but once separated, no amount of good deeds can bring us back to Him again
full agreement.
The point is that however sinful you think the persons that Paul describes in chapter 1 and verses 18-32 are, you are no better. I am no better. All have sinned. The wages of sin is death. And nothing we can do can change that.
That IS the point of Romans 2, yes.
But Paul's message does not end at verse 32 of chapter 1, but continues into chapter 2: the Good News is that Jesus has provided for us. We can be redeemed by His Grace, undeserved. As long as we try to be "holy enough," keeping parts of the Law, we are doomed to failure. We are especially doomed when we look down on those who keep less of the Law than we do, since we are just as guilty.
Pauls message is large and encompassing, Yes
But Grace frees us from the downward spiral of failing to follow the Law. Where our natural inclinations continue to lead us on the path to death, the Holy Spirit is at work, because of His grace, transforming us into the persons God chooses to call His saints.
Yes, praise God. Preach it Brother! (I am serious, that is good word)
When you stop reading Romans at the end of Chapter 1, you are preaching exactly the lesson Paul is teaching us to avoid.
That depends on what you are preaching. The op was concerned with the seriousness of Homosexuality. Chapter one explains just how serious it is, and even what it is. I was using chapter one to say, this is an alternate to the scriptures that use the word abominable. chapters 2 and 3 do teach us not to judge those who sin, but that even if you are under wrath there is hope, through grace.
My message to the OP was simple, whether an abomination or not, homosex is going to bring judgement on you without forgiveness. And forgiveness will require repentence and a desire for God in truth.
I know this is going to bring me the "Judging others" speach. Is there one among you who does not say, "man, that is sin, repent and be saved". John said, "repent and be baptised". Paul tells us what sin is so we can adentify it in our lives and we are not to be silent about the truth of what is sin. From my heart I say with love, "Dude, quit sinning and follow Jesus". I tell the good news first but and would love to talk to any homosexual or anyone about God's love and mercy and grace, but if they say, "Is my lifestyle a sin? The answer is YES, without a doubt, not for judgement but because it is truth.
praise God. Preach it Brother! (I am serious, that is good word)
Linear Mode
