What do you think this means:

Given the cited scripture:

  • God wiould approve of homosexual relations.

  • God would not approve of homosexual relations.

  • The scripture has nothing to do with same sex relations.


Results are only viewable after voting.

Rebekka

meow meow meow meow meow meow
Oct 25, 2006
13,101
1,229
✟34,375.00
Faith
Marital Status
Married
Some like it hot is one of my all-time favourite films. Were Jack Lemmon and Tony Curtis sinning when they were wearing women's clothes in the film? (Apart from the discussion whether acting is a sin in the first place.)

I sometimes wear one of my husband's shirts. I also wear trousers sometimes. Is that wrong?
 
Upvote 0

Miracle Storm

...
Supporter
Nov 26, 2005
22,680
1,213
✟74,696.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
ahh yes of course. So all women that wear men's jeans are an abomination to God.

Not all homosexuals are cross dressers, just by the way. ;)
I wear women's jeans btw.
I am guilty of occasionally wearing my 13 year old son's shirts. :blush:
 
Upvote 0

TheFathersDaughter

The Revolution has Started
Mar 3, 2007
480
84
33
✟9,792.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Green
Remember when this was written.

In those days, men and women were seperate creatures as far as class. If a women were to wear mans clothing, it could be considered as her trying to place herself on the same level and disgraceful. If a man were to wear a womens clothing, he would be degrading himself.
If God takes much on that statement, every women who's ever worn jeans (especially jeans made for men) is destined for hell.
 
Upvote 0

TheFathersDaughter

The Revolution has Started
Mar 3, 2007
480
84
33
✟9,792.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Green
as an aside? I agree with MercyBurst who agrees with UberLutheran .....these may well BE the Last Days! :eek:
tulc(going to drink a LOT of coffee today, just in case) :sorry:

Better get crackin -gives you JaveHut gift cards-
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,555
6,061
EST
✟990,026.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
[SIZE=-1]Remember when this was written.

In those days, men and women were seperate creatures as far as class. If a women were to wear mans clothing, it could be considered as her trying to place herself on the same level and disgraceful. If a man were to wear a womens clothing, he would be degrading himself.
If God takes much on that statement, every women who's ever worn jeans (especially jeans made for men) is destined for hell.[/SIZE]

Nice inflammatory misrepresentation. Nowhere does the Bible state anything like that. And the Jews, remember them? They spoke Hebrew, never interpreted any Biblical passage like that.

I guess the object is, try to make parts of the Bible look arbitrary or ridiculous, to justify or legitimize one's own actions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Miracle Storm
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,555
6,061
EST
✟990,026.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Try to calm down Der Alter, these homosexuals and their supporters tearing down and belittling the BIBLE is nothing new.

Hey, that's the only exercise I get, jumping to conclusions, beating a dead horse, flying off the handle, beating around the bush, and running around in circles.
 
Upvote 0

gwdboi

Regular Member
Oct 30, 2006
170
27
Greenwood, SC
Visit site
✟8,224.00
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat
What a convenient out for the pro-homosexual side.

If God does not even want us to dress in the manner of the opposite sex, then it is also obvious, ipso facto, he would not want us to be having same sex relations.

that's quite a non sequitur
 
Upvote 0

gwdboi

Regular Member
Oct 30, 2006
170
27
Greenwood, SC
Visit site
✟8,224.00
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat
Not all homosexuals choose a lifestyle that involves having same sex sexual relations, according to some homosexuals that is the worst sin of all: denying yourself of having a same sex union.

The wost sin of all is not allowing yourself to be who you are whatever that may be.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

gwdboi

Regular Member
Oct 30, 2006
170
27
Greenwood, SC
Visit site
✟8,224.00
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat
Well how do you assume that the scripture there is speaking about clothes. Are you taking the LITERAL meaning?

Deut 22:5 NIV
5 A woman must not wear men's clothing, nor a man wear women's clothing, for the LORD your God detests anyone who does this.

Deut 22:5 NKJV
A woman shall not wear anything that pertains to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman’s garment, for all who do so are an abomination to the LORD your God.

Deut 22:5 AMP
The woman shall not wear that which pertains to a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment, for all that do so are an abomination to the Lord your God.

Deut 22:5 NASB
A woman shall not wear man's clothing, nor shall a man put on a woman's clothing; for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD your God.


IN WHAT other way can these verses be taken?
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,555
6,061
EST
✟990,026.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
[SIZE=-1]Deut 22:5 NIV
5 A woman must not wear men's clothing, nor a man wear women's clothing, for the LORD your God detests anyone who does this.

Deut 22:5 NKJV
A woman shall not wear anything that pertains to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman’s garment, for all who do so are an abomination to the LORD your God.

Deut 22:5 AMP
The woman shall not wear that which pertains to a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment, for all that do so are an abomination to the Lord your God.

Deut 22:5 NASB
A woman shall not wear man's clothing, nor shall a man put on a woman's clothing; for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD your God.

IN WHAT other way can these verses be taken?[/SIZE]

I'm glad you asked that question. But it raises a few issues. First, virtually everyone around here who supports pro-homosexual arguments adamantly opposes literal interpretations because literal interpretation of the Bible clearly reveals it condemns homosexual acts.

So this post looks suspiciously like special pleading. IOW the Bible is literal where it supports you but not literal when it doesn't.

Another issue is, what you assume it says in English is not necessarily the most correct translation of the Hebrew.
John Gill commentary -Deu 22:5 - The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man,.... It being very unseemly and impudent, and contrary to the modesty of her sex; or there shall not be upon her any "instrument of a man" (f), any utensil of his which he makes use of in his trade and business; as if she was employed in it, when her business was not to do the work of men, but to take care of her house and family; and so this law may be opposed to the customs of the Egyptians, as is thought, from whom the Israelites were lately come; whose women, as Herodotus (g) relates, used to trade and merchandise abroad, while the men kept at home; and the word also signifies armour (h), as Onkelos renders it; and so here forbids women putting on a military habit and going with men to war, as was usual with the eastern women; and so Maimonides (i) illustrates it, by putting a mitre or an helmet on her head, and clothing herself with a coat of mail; and in like manner Josephus (k) explains it,"take heed, especially in war, that a woman do not make use of the habit of a man, or a man that of a woman;''nor is he to be found fault with so much as he is by a learned writer (l),

(f) כלי גבר "instrumentum virile", Pagninus, Junius et Tremellius; "instrumentum viri", Vatablus. (g) Euterpe, sive, l. 2. c. 35. (h) "Arma viri", Munster. (i) Hilchot Obede Cochabim, c. 12. sect. 10.​
 
Upvote 0

BAFRIEND

Well-Known Member
Feb 16, 2007
15,847
1,173
✟23,362.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
The wost sin of all is not allowing yourself to be who you are whatever that may be.
Would that hold true for child molestors and rapists also ?

Not comparing homosexuals to them (even though they are responsible for AIDS but will never tale resppnsiblity for that) to rapists and child molestors, but if you allow that argument, then should it not also apply for them (perverts) ?
 
Upvote 0

tulc

loves "SO'S YER MOM!! posts!
May 18, 2002
49,401
18,801
68
✟271,570.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
even though they are responsible for AIDS but will never tale resppnsiblity for that

Wow. I've been gone for a week or so and what do I see my first day back? This interesting tidbit. Were you being serious or not? :scratch:
tulc(always likes to check before jumping in) :)
 
Upvote 0