Why is Fundamental Christians so down on Homosexuality?

[HeavenzAngel]

gays can live a monagamous life,and alot do, straight people aren't the only people who are monagamous.

 

[S Walch]

gays can live a monagamous life,and alot do, straight people aren't the only people who are monagamous.

But HowardDean was just saying that there's no such thing as two males living a monagamous relationship. Last time I looked, there's more than just males that are homosexual.

But in the case of hetero vs homo for monagamous relationships, Hetero wins the battle as there's many more hetero living monagamous relationships than htose that are gay.

But then, as HowardDean also pointed out, they're still fornicating.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

There's enough heterosexuals that don't live a monagamous life, am I being hateful saying that?

That isn't what was said

" can say there is no such thing as 2 males being monogamous"

which is a blanket, bigoted statement

 

[lilymarie]

Charles and Genez, (please leave my post for Charles and Genez to answer -- thank you.)

I have a question... Jesus' last prayer for the Apostles to the Father was "sanctify them for the truth, your word is truth"... so, if the NT hadn't been written yet because this prayer was just before Jesus was crucified, what truth of the word would that be?

Wouldn't that include the law which is written upon our hearts?

And part two:

The two commandments really were clarified as "Love God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength, and love thy neighbor as thyself -- ALL the law and prophets hang on these two things." (that's a memory quote, I need to check the exact scripture -- brb.)

Edit in scripture: Matthew 22

22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
22:38 This is the first and great commandment.
22:39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.[SIZE=-1]
[/SIZE] 22:40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

 

[Charles YTK]

Charles and Genez, (please leave my post for Charles and Genez to answer -- thank you.)

I have a question... Jesus' last prayer for the Apostles to the Father was "sanctify them for the truth, your word is truth"... so, if the NT hadn't been written yet because this prayer was just before Jesus was crucified, what truth of the word would that be?

Wouldn't that include the law which is written upon our hearts?

And part two:

The two commandments really were clarified as "Love God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength, and love thy neighbor as thyself -- ALL the law and prophets hang on these two things." (that's a memory quote, I need to check the exact scripture -- brb.)

Edit in scripture: Matthew 22

22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
22:38 This is the first and great commandment.
22:39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.[SIZE=-1]
[/SIZE] 22:40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Lilly,
I am not sure I understand your questions so if I miss ask again.

no 1

Yes this would be the Old Testament and in particular the Torah because this is the word of God. When Paul says to Timothy 2 tim 3:16 that all scripture is inspired of God and to be used for doctrine,reproof, correction and training in righteousness to prepare us for all good works. (Also from memory) he is talking in terms of the old Testament as that was the only scriptures to Paul and the nation. No new testament even on the horizon yet.

Paul speaks of us being sanctified and made holy by the "regeneration through washing of the word." He is making this same statement that living by the Torah of God we are washed and sanctified, made into Holy people. It is not like a lightning bolt. It is a like a tree growing up in the field from a root of faith.


For 2,

The two commandments are the rendering of the law down into its most basic components. All the others are summed up in those two. These two do not replace all the other laws, they lie underneith the others and are key to keeping them. If I love my neighbor I will not: steal from him, commit adultery with his wife, bear false witnes against him, ect. And I will keep the commandments that pertain to loving God, honoring him, keeping his sabbath, observing his appointed times, sharing his glory with others, staying away from idols, being faithful to him, ect.

So the two uphold and undergird the others.

 

[icedtea]

That isn't what was said

" can say there is no such thing as 2 males being monogamous"

which is a blanket, bigoted statement

And factual, from having found out first hand.

 

[icedtea]

I'm used to seeing people say hateful things, thats why I try to not tell people anything about me, they might use it against me or judge me, because it makes them feel better about themselves.
People usually hate on people, because they are guilty of doing the same thing and feel ashame so they feel better dissing others.

Having been celibate for 12 years, your statement is completely wrong.

 

[GenemZ]

Peter didn't nullify Dietary laws.

That is not what I said... I said, the dietary laws were nullified with Peter. Not, by Peter.

Acts 11:5-9 (New International Version)
"I was in the city of Joppa praying, and in a trance I saw a vision. I saw something like a large sheet being let down from heaven by its four corners, and it came down to where I was. I looked into it and saw four-footed animals of the earth, wild beasts, reptiles, and birds of the air.

Then I heard a voice telling me, 'Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.'


"I replied, 'Surely not, Lord! Nothing impure or unclean has ever entered my mouth.'
"The voice spoke from heaven a second time, 'Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.'
​

Where did you get that Angels were the first to practice homsexuality?

God created angels originally with sexual capacity.

'Beni ha Elohiym' means 'sons of Gods'. 'Beni' means sons or children. Ha is 'of the'. And Elohiym is the Plural of God - Gods - meaning the Trinity. 'Beni ha Elohiym' is used four times in the Old Testament and it always refers to angels - Job 1:6, 2:1, 38:7 and here.

Genesis 6:1-4
"Now it came about, when men began to multiply on the face of the land, and daughters were born to them, that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful; and they took/ 'seized passionately' to them women of all whom they examined and selected.


Then the LORD said, "My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years."
The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown."
​

Men were not referred to as sons of God until we were baptized into Christ. Only angels were officially given that title in the OT.

God made laws for many things. But who are we to choose which are important. God has that authority not man. And since he says that when the Lord (Yeshua) comes to judge the nations those who are eating Pork and rats will be found in the place of Judgment. Are we simple to corect God and tell him he has no right because the Church fathers said it was OK?

No, but rats and pork are eaten primarlity in Communist
China and may have significance in that respect.

The Law still holds value to the Church. But, its not longer as it was before. Now it teaches principles of Law, rather than being directly Law. Paul sets an example of this new application:

1 Corinthians 9:8-10 (New International Version)
"Do I say this merely from a human point of view? Doesn't the Law say the same thing? For it is written in the Law of Moses: "Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain." Is it about oxen that God is concerned?

Surely he says this for us, doesn't he? Yes, this was written for us, because when the plowman plows and the thresher threshes, they ought to do so in the hope of sharing in the harvest."
​

The Law took on a new meaning and life for the Church age. Its is not to be ignored. But, it is no longer to be seen as a literal command. For, if it were? All homosexuals would be executed. Yet, the principle of how God views homosexuality is made known to the Church by means of what is written into the Law. Otherwise, we would have openly gay leaders in the Church. They get in anyway.....

In Christ, GeneZ
​

​

 

[Charles YTK]

That is not what I said... I said, the dietary laws were nullified with Peter. Not, by Peter.

Acts 11:5-9 (New International Version)​

"I was in the city of Joppa praying, and in a trance I saw a vision. I saw something like a large sheet being let down from heaven by its four corners, and it came down to where I was. I looked into it and saw four-footed animals of the earth, wild beasts, reptiles, and birds of the air. ​

Then I heard a voice telling me, 'Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.' ​

"I replied, 'Surely not, Lord! Nothing impure or unclean has ever entered my mouth.' ​

"The voice spoke from heaven a second time, 'Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.'​

And from this you think it was about food? The animals are symbolic of Gentiles who are considered animals by the Rabbincal Jews.

What did Peter say about the vision?
Peter says that the vision was about Men not about food.

Acts 10: [27] And as he talked with him, he went in, and found many that were come together. [28] And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean. [29] Therefore came I unto you without gainsaying, as soon as I was sent for: I ask therefore for what intent ye have sent for me?

It does not say that God had shown him that no food is unclean. The vision is about Men, Gentiles who were considered dogs, animals by Rabbinical Jews. We can not dispute this. God showed Peter what the vision meant and Peter told us. It is a done deal. We can't go back now and tell Peter he didn't know what he was talking about can we?


If you would read the account correctly you will also see that Cornelius is a God fearer, a Near Proselyte and would have been eating a Kosher diet himself. He wa already a member of the Torah community in his town. He simply had not been circumcised. Peter brings him th eGospel which does not require the circumcision of Gentiles.

God created angels originally with sexual capacity.

'Beni ha Elohiym' means 'sons of Gods'. 'Beni' means sons or children. Ha is 'of the'. And Elohiym is the Plural of God - Gods - meaning the Trinity. 'Beni ha Elohiym' is used four times in the Old Testament and it always refers to angels - Job 1:6, 2:1, 38:7 and here.

The Beni ELohim saw the DAUGHTERS of men and took from them wives. This is not a homosexual relationship. It might me Xenosexual though I doubt that as well since they were close enough in kind that they bore children. There is no Homosexuality shown here.

No, but rats and pork are eaten primarlity in Communist
China and may have significance in that respect.

I don't know where you live but in America Pork is the largest section in the meat cases in any food store. You willfind a little fish, maybe one piece of lamb, some beef and poultery, but Pork dominates the sales. Go to a restaurant here in the south and you may find nothing without Pork in it, the beans, the cooked cabbage, the salads, the fish is cooked with it, sandwiches have bacon on them, almost everything is Pork products. I went into a restaurant in Lousiana and the Menu was 4 or five pages and we left because there was not one item that was edible and biblically clean, there was shrimp in every fashion, crab, lobster, crawfish, catfish, oysters, muscles, pork every way you can think to cook it and that was it. I have spent time in communist China and they have nothing on these Cajuns, except for the large vats of snakes and cages of puppies and cats. Southern food is limited only to what is at some point a living creature.

The Law still holds value to the Church. But, its not longer as it was before. Now it teaches principles of Law, rather than being directly Law. Paul sets an example of this new application:

1 Corinthians 9:8-10 (New International Version)​

"Do I say this merely from a human point of view? Doesn't the Law say the same thing? For it is written in the Law of Moses: "Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain." Is it about oxen that God is concerned? ​

Surely he says this for us, doesn't he? Yes, this was written for us, because when the plowman plows and the thresher threshes, they ought to do so in the hope of sharing in the harvest."​

The Law took on a new meaning and life for the Church age. Its is not to be ignored. But, it is no longer to be seen as a literal command. For, if it were? All homosexuals would be executed. Yet, the principle of how God views homosexuality is made known to the Church by means of what is written into the Law. Otherwise, we would have openly gay leaders in the Church. They get in anyway.....

In Christ, GeneZ​

​

You are correct in your observation. But I think you mght be in error concerning the correctness of that doctrine.

 

[JacobHall86]

The Question should be "Why is it that it seems as though only the more Conservative Christians still value the truth of the Word of God, the whole truth, not simply parts?".

 

[ReformedChapin]

The Question should be "Why is it that it seems as though only the more Conservative Christians still value the truth of the Word of God, the whole truth, not simply parts?".

That because liberal "christians" only seek to satifisy postmodern thought not biblical truth.

Liberal argument " the bible says nothing about homosexuality....but wait the bible is wrong."

Preaching half truths to try to get conservatives to accept their "morals" when in reality all they preach is postmodernism and mysticism.

 

[eastcoast_bsc]

Apparently the former Pastor haggard was always Gay,

(CNN) -- Evangelical pastor Ted Haggard confessed on Sunday to a "lifelong" sexual problem, and said he was "a deceiver and a liar," in a letter read to his New Life Church.

This would lead one to surmise that he was always Homosexual, even from his earliest memories. Which begs the question, Is it nature or nurture?

 

[S Walch]

If it's nature, then Yahuweh is certainly a very confused God.

To be honest, Yahuweh isn't confused, so homsexuality isn't nature. I would probably say that as we're all born with the ability to be enticed to sin, we are then all born with the abilty to be "enticed to engage in homosexuality," just in the same way were are born with the ability to be "enticed to commit adultery" or to "fornicate" or to "blspeheme the name of God."

But no, God does not make people homosexuals at birth.

 

[Tenebrae]

um I don't know! I don'tthink he does to be honest...and YEP! There are a TON of fat people....BUT they aren't saying..HEY look at my lifestyle...come be fat like me...etc. like the gays do. YES< both are SIN...NO one has said differently. BUT....THIS is a let me say it slow so you get it....a thread on homosexuality.....maybe you should start one on sin of being fat!!!

Actually they pretty much are........ Its far easier to tell a fat person from a gay person

BTW, you never did tell me how the homosexual community is pushing their agenda on you

 

[lilymarie]

Lilly,
I am not sure I understand your questions so if I miss ask again.

no 1

Yes this would be the Old Testament and in particular the Torah because this is the word of God. When Paul says to Timothy 2 tim 3:16 that all scripture is inspired of God and to be used for doctrine,reproof, correction and training in righteousness to prepare us for all good works. (Also from memory) he is talking in terms of the old Testament as that was the only scriptures to Paul and the nation. No new testament even on the horizon yet.

Paul speaks of us being sanctified and made holy by the "regeneration through washing of the word." He is making this same statement that living by the Torah of God we are washed and sanctified, made into Holy people. It is not like a lightning bolt. It is a like a tree growing up in the field from a root of faith.


For 2,

The two commandments are the rendering of the law down into its most basic components. All the others are summed up in those two. These two do not replace all the other laws, they lie underneith the others and are key to keeping them. If I love my neighbor I will not: steal from him, commit adultery with his wife, bear false witnes against him, ect. And I will keep the commandments that pertain to loving God, honoring him, keeping his sabbath, observing his appointed times, sharing his glory with others, staying away from idols, being faithful to him, ect.

So the two uphold and undergird the others.

Oh sorry Charles I didn't clarify my point to well, but I think you've answered a bit.

My point was sort of disguised as even your OP says simply "love thy neighbor as thyself", and that is so often stated as though were like good to go as long as we do that.

But the true statement of love thy neighbor as thyself is really: love thy neighbor as thyself ALL the law and prophets hang on these two commandments (meaning including Love God with all your heart, mind and soul, of course, as the 'two' commandments.)

My point was that the rest of that meaning of scripture is often dropped, meaning regarding the law and the prophets.

If it didn't have the law and the prophets attached to loving thy neighbor as thyself... my point is what are we preaching?

Without the law and the prophets, what is "love thy neighbor as thyself..."?

My other point is if all the law and prophets hang upon loving God and loving our neighbor, how would we know HOW to love our neighbor if the law is completely dead?

The word love is a very odd word. I can say I love sewing, and that's really meaningless.

So, this brings me back to the scripture "love is the fulfillment of the law".

It doesn't seem the law is dead. Yet, if it is, which parts?

Of course we don't stone people to death and such. That was God dealing with early man, and, as I said in another post, it seems we have excelled and improved in parts of the law as a peoples and evolved, and in other parts we've regressed.

So how do we bring into balance "the law"? Which parts are applicable, which parts aren't?

And how does love tell us which parts of the law to keep?

And how do we bring into balance the law which is written upon our hearts and grace?

p.s. I'm not really sure where I'm going with this. I may need some more time to soul search to get to the heart of the matter of what I'm trying to seek answers for, but thanks for your responses to me!

 

[Tenebrae]

Is this a trick answer for some people Walch?

(I don't even get the original question so I'm just joking here with the rephrasing of the question. just being silly )


So anyways...

If you want to talk about "according to Leviticus" then let's see what else is an abomination.

Levitius 19 says...

9 " 'When you reap the harvest of your land, do not reap to the very edges of your field or gather the gleanings of your harvest. 10 Do not go over your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen. Leave them for the poor and the alien. I am the LORD your God.
15 " 'Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly.
17 " 'Do not hate your brother in your heart

18 " 'Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD. 19 " 'Keep my decrees.
" 'Do not mate different kinds of animals.
" 'Do not plant your field with two kinds of seed.
" 'Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material.
23 " 'When you enter the land and plant any kind of fruit tree, regard its fruit as forbidden.
27 " 'Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard.
33 " 'When an alien lives with you in your land, do not mistreat him. 34 The alien living with you must be treated as one of your native-born. Love him as yourself, for you were aliens in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

Sorry bro, but quoting Leviticus's laws in this situation isn't the way to prove homosexuality is a sin.

So unless you don't clip off the edges of your beard (you do have a beard, don't you?) then you're just as guilty as a 'homosexual'.


It's ridiculous, Christians will ignore the book of Leviticus' laws when it applies to them (beards, clothing, food, etc.) but when it comes to Homosexuals (who they obviously hate, despite Levitius 19:15,17, & 18) they quote Leviticus like it's undeniable.

It's one thing to say all the laws in the Book of Leviticus is to be followed. It's another to say none of them apply to us.
It's completely different though when you show favoritism and partiality and become a hypocrite and put yourself as God to say what does and what does not apply.

You go ahead and quote Leviticus, but you better have a massive beard and weird clothes. You also better follow all the hundreds of commandments in the Old Testament (there's like 300-600+ commandments, NOT 10.)

Leviticus? L.O.L. You've got to be kidding me.​

IN deuteronomy is says that if a woman is raped within a city, she must be taken along with her rapist to the city walls and stonned. Her, because she did not cry out

I wonder how many people would be willing to be stoning rape victims

 

[Charles YTK]

The Sinai covenant was for the people of Israel in the wilderness and in the lands of Israel. It had a Torah which regulated life. It applied also to the Gentiles who attached themselves to God and became part of Israel. But that covenant is expired, broken by Israel long ago. And the Torah of that Covenant is not valid in total.

Today we live in the New Covenant that was made through Yeshua and sealed in his blood. It also has a Torah. This Torah is written on the heart and it has many things in common with the Torah of Moshe but it is not a word for word copy of the Sinai Torah. It is transformed to be the Torah of a world wide Kingdom and to fit all people in all lands. Things that Yeshua taught are part of this Torah. Things that the prophets have shown us about the Kingdom are part of the New Torah. The prophets said we will mark our days from Sabbath to Sabbath and all the world will keep his Sabbath. We should then recognise that if it is written so for the Kigdom then it is already written on our hearts and begin being obedient to it. So also for many other things. Mcu of the Old Torah is still present in the New Covenant Torah but not all. Yes Kosher dietary laws are in the New Torah as we seem that as part of the judgment against those who say they know God but continue to eat what he calls an abomiation. We should then do as he says.

 

[lilymarie]

IN deuteronomy is says that if a woman is raped within a city, she must be taken along with her rapist to the city walls and stonned. Her, because she did not cry out

I wonder how many people would be willing to be stoning rape victims

That's not really what the meaning of that verse means. As a woman I have been raped which was no meant no meant no. And I have also consented to heterosexual sex before giving my life to Christ.

But back to the point in Deut. What was happening is that foreigners including prostitutes (both male and female) were joining God's chosen. Thus, if a woman did not cry out amid a city (which means a lot of people could hear) she was considered a prostitute.

However, it goes even deeper than that. If a woman voluntarily gave up her virgin blood, she couldn't become a married woman, so she was considered useless as her children would have been born conceived in sin as she was not a virgin, but more likely a prostitute or fornicator of her own free will, and the man was probably considered the same.

God was dealing with an early barbaric people with foreigners trying to join in, and chaos was breaking out. However, the Hebrews, though not all, were trying to listen to God's law and obey.

The virgin blood of a woman which was shed on the wedding night made the marriage covenant between man and woman, as all God's covenants where sealed in blood.

Thus if she gave it up voluntarily, there could be no marriage, but I think via the history I've studied that verse pertains more to prostitutes than anything regarding the foreigners who were trying to join the early Hebrews.

And as I've said, we've excelled and evolved in parts of the law, and in others, society has regressed.

And, no, we don't stone people to death anymore... as we are now free to chose Jesus Christ and the way or not.

Also, the virgin blood of a pure woman shed on the wedding night with her man runs parellel to our marriage covenant to Christ who is called the Bridegroom and we (his people) are called his Bride, and thus his virgin blood makes a blood covenant of us to him and it it his blood that makes us pure, though we were still bought with price, so we are to honor God with our body in thankfulness.

The virgin blood was important to be kept, as it was going to point to the coming Messiah, who shed his blood for us. It is only his blood that cleanses his bride, along with the washing of the water of the word.

There was a point to the virgin blood, which unfortunately this current world doesn't seem to understand.

(Also, if you'd like to read more about our marriage blood covenants, it's in my blog for anyone to read).

p.s. Wizeone, read the whole book of Deut., it will make a whole lot more sense that way.

 

[hithesh]

If it's nature, then Yahuweh is certainly a very confused God.

Yeah I know, he must be. I mean what else would explain why he creates Hermaphrodites, and 350,000 species of beetles.

God definitely needs some consultants, to help sort him out.

 

[TracerBullet]

The Question should be "Why is it that it seems as though only the more Conservative Christians still value the truth of the Word of God, the whole truth, not simply parts?".

Do you follow the bible in its entirety? Or do you only follow selected &#8220;parts&#8221;?

Your photograph indicates that you shave and cut your hair indicating you do not value Leviticus 19:27. you are wearing and clothes made of more than one material hair indicating you do not value Leviticus 19:19. while difficult to tell you seem to have a gold ring on indicating you do not value I Timothy 2:9. and you are looking like a typical well fed American indicating that you do not value the biblical prohibition against modern agriculture Lev. 19:19.
Do you keep slaves? If not then you are not valuing Exodus 21:2-11 and 1 Timothy 6:1-2 and many other verses.