Biblical support for gay sex? A simple question

[RMDY]

I still don't buy Joshua's genocide as being "just".

It was totally just. I argued my point a few posts ago.

I still don't buy Biblical slavery as "just".

Still, the Law of Moses asked slaves to be freed after a 6 year period (I think).

I don't buy stoning rape victims as "just",

Rape victims? Hmmmmm. Give me incidences where rape is justified in the bible.

and I don't buy homosexual condemnation as "just", either.

Because you don't recognize it to be a sin, so your going to say that.

I am open to discussion on the point, but to convince me I am mistaken,

Perhaps even if the greek proves you wrong you will still deny homosexuality to be a sin simply because you cannot accept it because you like homosexuality and cannot give it up?

you'll need to come up with more than "the Bible SEZ!".

We were not designed naturally that way. Homosexuality is more like a mutation, kind of like having 6 fingers, or even having female and male organs at the same time! Its not natural but it occures and its there, and some people find it extremely difficult to give it up. For example hermfs were not designed to be hermfs (hermafrodies) but somewhere along the lines of being created in the womb they happened to mutate into what they are now.

 

[RMDY]

Sure. The whole love one anothewrs as yourself bit. To me, that translates as "Consider yourselves in the position of the other person in all things to determine if your actions are righteous"

And if you do this, it is impossible to condemn homosexuals. Murderers, thieves, adulterers, tax cheats... they all fail the "would I like it if I was in the other guy's shoes" test. Homosexuality does not.

Jesus loved God as himself, does this mean Jesus is homosexual towards God? Jesus commands us to love God with all our soul does this mean were homosexual towards God!? Of course not. It means agape---unconditional love, which is what Jonathan did with David. Jonathan gave Dave his armour, which is a way of exalting David to a position higher than himself---signifying Jonathan recognized David was the annointed King of Israel, something that Saul had taken away from him.

SECONDLY,

If your going to know how something translates and just make up your own interpretation, then be my guest and take Oprah's path! Look at her now! She preaches more than one way to God, just like what you suggested to me, and she believes in gnosticism, something I really hope you don't believe in. She also criticises the teachings of christianity and embraces her own interpretations. Is that the path you want to take? "Having a form of godliness yet deny it's power"? I seriously hope not!

 

[darkshadow]

It was totally just. I argued my point a few posts ago.


Still, the Law of Moses asked slaves to be freed after a 6 year period (I think).


Rape victims? Hmmmmm. Give me incidences where rape is justified in the bible.



Because you don't recognize it to be a sin, so your going to say that.


Perhaps even if the greek proves you wrong you will still deny homosexuality to be a sin simply because you cannot accept it because you like homosexuality and cannot give it up?

you'll need to come up with more than "the Bible SEZ!".

We were not designed naturally that way. Homosexuality is more like a mutation, kind of like having 6 fingers, or even having female and male organs at the same time! Its not natural but it occures and its there, and some people find it extremely difficult to give it up. For example hermfs were not designed to be hermfs (hermafrodies) but somewhere along the lines of being created in the womb they happened to mutate into what they are now.

You are wasting your time I have look in my past posts. I have shown over and over and over again, Biblical answers for each and everyone of her arguments and its the same thing. "I don't agree and the Bible is wrong, so don't say because the Bible sez." Oh and you are right, Israelites were to let fellow Israelites go after 6 years. The rape incident you will get is Deuteronomy 22:23-24 and will take it out of context to mean something it does not. Also likes to change the meaning of consent. Just thought I'd warn ya.

Post #349 Should Christians oppose gay civil marriage?
Deuteronomy 22:23.

ENEMYPARTYII:
"It says any betrothed woman who has sex in a city without calling out for help shall be put to death, because she consents.

Hence, I offer the example of the 13 year old at knife point. She most certainly does NOT consent, yet, if we use only the Biblical definition, she did, and should be put to death.

 

[Dogbean]

What an outstanding series of posts, John Chapter 14!

 

[KCKID]

I wouldn't want to worship a god who would subject me to an eternity of horrible torture for not believing in him (when there is no evidence that he exists), for not wanting to worship him (when the Bible shows him to be an arbitrary, petulant, bloodthirsty tyrant), and for having sex with people of my own sex (which doesn't hurt anyone).

God already says your sinful and separated from him naturally. Can you prove you don't deserve to die?

You're including yourself as being sinful, separated from God naturally, and deserving of death, I take it ...? You do realize, of course, that Andreusz doesn't believe any of that stuff, don't you?

Argue your case! GO for it. I doubt your a righteous and good person. I doubt you would even pass the test!

Andreusz claims to be an atheist. He doesn't believe in 'righteousness' per se so what 'case' does he have to argue? Furthermore, why are you treating him like a lesser human being than you profess yourself to be? Would YOU pass the test for 'righteousness'?

 

[KCKID]

What an outstanding series of posts, John Chapter 14!

Well, to each his own, I guess. I find John's posts to be rather sanctimonious in tone as well as rather demeaning to others. I don't think that 'outstanding' is the operative word from a Christian perspective. That one can present selective scriptures almost by rote does not necessarily a Christian make. Most of the 'hardliners' tend to lack understanding of the complexities of 'being human'. Instead they present 'words' from a book as if the words themselves will convert others to 'their' way of thinking. That, generally, will not happen.

Why is it that the real 'hardliners' usually ignore the FACT that homosexuality is not of an individual's choosing? This is the one thing that really irks me about Christianity vs homosexuality. Not only is homosexuality not of the individual's choosing but the consensual sexual ACT itself would generally not be harmful to anyone else. At least no more harmful than consensual heterosexual sex. What especially irks me is that those 'so sexually orientated' are even picked on by professed Christians when they 1. desire a committed monogamous relationship with someone they care for, and 2. profess a need for Jesus Christ in their lives.

I've reached the point on this subforum where I've all but developed an aversion to most of the 'hardliner' posts. I feel, deep down, that they are NOT representative of the teachings of Jesus Christ. I really mean this and don't say it merely to support some kind of 'agenda'. I pray that the day will come when homosexuality (which is merely another variation of sexuality and nothing more sinister) becomes an accepted part of Christian culture.

Whether heterosexual or homosexual, those who share the church pew should not be subject to any form of scrutinizing or grilling that involves personal intimacy within the bedroom setting. The last thing I want to think about is what my Christian brethren get up to in bed. For me, that is an absolute no-no! What I am more interested in is what my Christian brethren get up to OUTSIDE the bedroom to fulfill the command to love their neighbor, tend to the poor and the needy, visit the sick and the incarcerated, etc. And THAT is what every Christian should be more concerned about than who is 'making out' with a committed 'whom'.

I believe that homosexuality would have to be the biggest 'non-issue' that has ever been perpetrated on Christianity. And, as long as it continues to be so, the REAL issues facing the world are being all but ignored.

 

[D.W.Washburn]

Still, the Law of Moses asked slaves to be freed after a 6 year period (I think).

So, biblical slavery is slightly less unjust than non-biblical slavery?

 

[RMDY]

You're including yourself as being sinful, separated from God naturally, and deserving of death, I take it ...? You do realize, of course, that Andreusz doesn't believe any of that stuff, don't you?

Yes, of course, but athiests have this attitude that "good" people exist in this world, therefore, I insist on them reflecting themselves before they try to prove they shouldn't deserve death.

Andreusz claims to be an atheist. He doesn't believe in 'righteousness' per se so what 'case' does he have to argue? Furthermore, why are you treating him like a lesser human being than you profess yourself to be? Would YOU pass the test for 'righteousness'?

Forgive me for not coming across as humble---I do not look down on athiests but rather have an attitude towards people who think ignorantly about God and creative design. I am not righteous---Jesus Christ is my righteousness---he paid the penalty for my sins.

 

[griggs1947]

I agree with Darkshadow and Andreusz. Homo- and bisexuality are mere genetic products that harm no one and thus are not a sin in themselves. None deserve death for our beliefs and loving whom we love. Goodwill to all.

 

[RMDY]

Well, to each his own, I guess. I find John's posts to be rather sanctimonious in tone as well as rather demeaning to others.
I don't think that 'outstanding' is the operative word from a Christian perspective. That one can present selective scriptures almost by rote does not necessarily a Christian make.

So that makes me the bad buy because I make attempts with an attitude to rebuke a person by showing how ridiculous their reasoning is?

Someone tells me that God supports genocide. I find this as ridiculously ignorant as seeing tabloid magazines for years after years proclaiming Brad Pitt and Angela Joline are on the verge of a break up or separation with Jennifer Aniston in the middle of it! Or for that matter when someone tells me the bible is against homosexuality but they choose not to believe in it because they think the bible is not completely true, well, ya, I will rebuke such a person with a certain attitude, because, their belief is ignorant.

Your right though---I should be more gentle and kind in responding to people on these forums as I would be in person, but I can't help but feel more bold in writing than I am in speech, as I feel this is a good way to get my point across.

So what is your point of accusing me of being a pious hypocrite? Were discussing facts and points about the bible here concerning homosexuality, not on what kind of christian I am. Whether I am a bad or "good" christian, it doesn't change the facts concerning homosexuality in the bible. If Someone pops the question "I think God is a deuchebag because he supports genocide" and ya, I'm going to rebuke such a statement, because its slander and manipulation. I can't help it. I can't help it when people make statements like that, because it leads people astray. Speaking of which, I was at a dinner today and someone brought up the movie zeitgeist and was talking to my grandfather all about how christianity is a kind of system of control, like other religions, that are connected with a bunch of elites who desire to rule the world! So ya, if someone is ignorant about the facts I am not going to be as nice in dealing with them and will make their beliefs as ridiculous as possible.

Most of the 'hardliners' tend to lack understanding of the complexities of 'being human'.

Instead they present 'words' from a book as if the words themselves will convert others to 'their' way of thinking. That, generally, will not happen.

True, but when were discussing on the topic about "proof" from scripture, so it is irrelevent how someone's brain is affected, as ultimately the conclusion of the argument will come down to what the bible says, not how the human brain is effected. If someone is presenting the gospel to another, that is a different story, but here, that is not the case; were discussing proofs of whether homosexuality exists in the bible or not. For example, someone suggested Jonathan and David are gay.
Well, that is an ignorant strawman statement. First of all, it shows they lack an understanding of Jewish culture, secondly it shows they lack knowledge about agape, and thirdly, it shows they lack an understanding of exactly what was said in relation to the bible. If their argument is because "David loved Jonathan with all his soul" well, one could argue, because Jesus commands us to love God with all our soul, therefore, christianity must be a gay religion! Or to love God is to be a homosexual!

Why is it that the real 'hardliners' usually ignore the FACT that homosexuality is not of an individual's choosing?

Why do liberals who support homosexuality believe the bible isn't 100% true and even there could be more than one way to God other than Jesus?

This is the one thing that really irks me about Christianity vs homosexuality. Not only is homosexuality not of the individual's choosing but the consensual sexual ACT itself would generally not be harmful to anyone else.

I present the case that God did not design us for the purpose of homosexuality, and I also present the case that such acts pervert and defile oneself. I also present the case that homosexuality is counterfeit to heterosexuality and is something originating from man and not from God. Its unfortunante if one feels they cannot give it up or they were born that way, but seriously, one is not born homosexual. There is no such thing as a gay gene, so no one can say they are born gay.

At least no more harmful than consensual heterosexual sex.

I only say what the bible said, which is that homosexuality sex is an abomination and it defiles oneself, especially because our bodies are temples of God when we follow Jesus and have the Holy Spirit dwelling within us.

What especially irks me is that those 'so sexually orientated' are even picked on by professed Christians when they 1. desire a committed monogamous relationship with someone they care for, and 2. profess a need for Jesus Christ in their lives.

Fornicators also fornicate and claim they follow Jesus Christ. Yet were called not to do that. It is God's will that we are to abstain from sexual immorality.

I've reached the point on this subforum where I've all but developed an aversion to most of the 'hardliner' posts. I feel, deep down, that they are NOT representative of the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Do you want quotations from the bible concerning what I am saying?

I really mean this and don't say it merely to support some kind of 'agenda'. I pray that the day will come when homosexuality (which is merely another variation of sexuality and nothing more sinister) becomes an accepted part of Christian culture.

It won't become accepted because you can't change the greek for sexual immorality and the fact God called homosexuality sex a sexual abomination. Furthermore, you can't change the fact Jesus and the apostles both affirm that people are to abstain from sexual immorality---in fact they emphasize it!

Whether heterosexual or homosexual, those who share the church pew should not be subject to any form of scrutinizing or grilling that involves personal intimacy within the bedroom setting.

People who try to cut the bedroom away from church matters are ignorant of the fact that they cannot hide what they do from the living God.

The last thing I want to think about is what my Christian brethren get up to in bed.

Thats not what I am thinking. I am concerned on matters about scripture more than what someone is doing in their bedroom. I cannot stop what people do in their bedroom, but when someone tries to promote a teaching that isn't inline with sound docrine and scripture, I am going to say something.

For me, that is an absolute no-no! What I am more interested in is what my Christian brethren get up to OUTSIDE the bedroom

to fulfill the command to love their neighbor, tend to the poor and the needy, visit the sick and the incarcerated, etc. And THAT is what every Christian should be more concerned about than who is 'making out' with a committed 'whom'.

I believe that homosexuality would have to be the biggest 'non-issue' that has ever been perpetrated on Christianity. And, as long as it continues to be so, the REAL issues facing the world are being all but ignored.

Homosexuality is a trojan horse in the church. Sexual immorality is a very big issue in the church, so much that Jesus himself said not to do it in the book of revelation, and so much that the apostles put a lot of emphasis for christians to abstain from sexuality immorality, furthermore, they also state that it is God's will to abstain from sexual immorality, so yes, it does matter a lot because I consider homosexuality to be sexual immorality and to reject all of that is to make the apostles and Jesus out to be liars.

 

[RMDY]

So, biblical slavery is slightly less unjust than non-biblical slavery?

I didn't say I support slavery---but then again, it was dealing with matters concerning those times. Does it matter if slavery exists in old testament or not? I guess that makes God and the Israelites a bunch of bad guys now, doesn't it. At least there were rules governing slavery in the Law of Moses.

 

[RMDY]

I agree with Darkshadow and Andreusz. Homo- and bisexuality are mere genetic products that harm no one and thus are not a sin in themselves. None deserve death for our beliefs and loving whom we love. Goodwill to all.

That would be nice, except homosexuality is not genetic, since no gay gene exists.

 

[OllieFranz]

That would be nice, except homosexuality is not genetic, since no gay gene exists.

"That would be nice, except race is not genetic, since no black gene exists."

Genetic factors may include a complex of genes, no one gene in that complex being essential in determining the quality that they together determine. From a purely genetic point of view it is said that there is no such thing as race, since samples all of the alleles (variant genes) that determine "racial" characteristics can be found in populations of members of each of the races. There are no alleles that show up only among "blacks"; no alleles that show up only among Asians; no alleles that show up only among Western Europeans, etc.

And yet, a black couple will give birth to a black baby, an Asian couple to an Asian baby, etc. It is because enough of the alleles that proportionately show up more in that population than in any other population have been inherited.

Similarly, a single, identifiable "gay gene" is not necessary to show that homosexuality has a genetic component. It is enough to show that it runs in families, even after adjusting for "nurture" factors such as religion and culture, etc. There have been enough studies of siblings raised in separate adoptive families to strongly indicate a genetic factor as a predisposition toward a gay orientation. As certainly as science can "prove" anything genetic that is not caused by a single defective gene, it has proven a genetic basis for homosexuality.

 

[Andreusz]

God already says your sinful and separated from him naturally. Can you prove you don't deserve to die?

Argue your case! GO for it. I doubt your a righteous and good person. I doubt you would even pass the test!

It depends what you mean by 'deserve'. My country does not impose the death penalty for any crimes, so by that standard I obviously don't deserve to die. Do you mean I should prove that I don't deserve to be punished by God? Well, I don't believe in God. But if he exists, he must first explain to me why he punishes 'sins' that in no way harm other people, while visiting horrible fates on thousands of people who have never done anyone any harm.

 

[Andreusz]

I certainly do not call homosexuality holy. It is a counterfeit, just like false religions. Homosexuality counterfeits hetrosexuality.

My homosexual feelings feel like real feelings to me.

False religions counterfeit God's relationship with mankind.

How do you know that the gods of Olympus aren't the true gods, and your god the false one? Because he says so? Not a good enough reason.

Lusts are counterfeit ways of loving people.

Homosexuals feel love for each other, not just lust.

Banks burn counterfeit money. Farmers burn counterfeit wheat, which is chaff. The government destroys counterfeit materials such as driver liscences that were forged falsely. Hey, it hurts to have a counterfeit bill only to be told you are denied what you expected to get. If I live as a counterfeit christian living in lies, then I would be denying myself the life I should be living in Jesus.

"Counterfeit wheat"?
You love the idea of other people burning for their 'sins', don't you?

 

[Andreusz]

Oh yes, like how we as well as this universe were created from nothing without a cause for no reason and by chance everything happened the way it was to the point where we exist today, by chance, without cause, and for no reason?

Before you dismiss the cumulative consensus of hundreds of highly educated scientists and biologists, I suggest that you do a lot of reading to find out what modern cosmology and modern biology actually say. Otherwise you will just come across as breathtakingly stupid, which I am sure is not the case.

 

[D.W.Washburn]

I didn't say I support slavery---but then again, it was dealing with matters concerning those times. Does it matter if slavery exists in old testament or not? I guess that makes God and the Israelites a bunch of bad guys now, doesn't it. At least there were rules governing slavery in the Law of Moses.

So the rules about slavery were a product of their times and culturally conditioned, but the rules about homosexual behavior are eternally set in stone?

Be careful, John, this kind of relativism can lead you to support gay marriage...

 

[RMDY]

"That would be nice, except race is not genetic, since no black gene exists."

Thats very ignorant of you---there is something concerning that called eugenics, which resulted in darwinism, the holocaust, and modern science today when it comes to population controls. I recall somewhere that genes also exist for skin color. Black traits are often dominant in the gene pool.

Genetic factors may include a complex of genes, no one gene in that complex being essential in determining the quality that they together determine.

That is a speculation in regards to homosexuality. People are not gay from birth.

From a purely genetic point of view it is said that there is no such thing as race, since samples all of the alleles (variant genes) that determine "racial" characteristics can be found in populations of members of each of the races.

There is also eugenics, which accounts for race in terms of genetics. Furthermore, although not said, there are "racial" traits that can be passed on. Black traits tend to be most dominant.

There are no alleles that show up only among "blacks"; no alleles that show up only among Asians; no alleles that show up only among Western Europeans, etc.

And yet, a black couple will give birth to a black baby, an Asian couple to an Asian baby, etc. It is because enough of the alleles that proportionately show up more in that population than in any other population have been inherited.

Similarly, a single, identifiable "gay gene" is not necessary to show that homosexuality has a genetic component. It is enough to show that it runs in families, even after adjusting for "nurture" factors such as religion and culture, etc. There have been enough studies of siblings raised in separate adoptive families to strongly indicate a genetic factor as a predisposition toward a gay orientation. As certainly as science can "prove" anything genetic that is not caused by a single defective gene, it has proven a genetic basis for homosexuality.

Homosexuality is not genetic but a sociological development over a person's lifetime.

The American Psychiatric Association has stated "some people believe that sexual orientation is innate and fixed; however, sexual orientation develops across a person’s lifetime."[24] However, the American Psychological Association has stated "most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation."[25]

1. ^ a b American Psychiatric Association (May 2000). "Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Issues". Association of Gay and Lesbian Psychiatrics.
2. ^ "Answers to Your Questions About Sexual Orientation and Homosexuality". American Psychological Association. Retrieved on 2008-05-26.

 

[RMDY]

It depends what you mean by 'deserve'. My country does not impose the death penalty for any crimes, so by that standard I obviously don't deserve to die. Do you mean I should prove that I don't deserve to be punished by God? Well, I don't believe in God. But if he exists, he must first explain to me why he punishes 'sins' that in no way harm other people, while visiting horrible fates on thousands of people who have never done anyone any harm.

What sins are you referring to?

 

[RMDY]

So the rules about slavery were a product of their times and culturally conditioned, but the rules about homosexual behavior are eternally set in stone?

Do I really have to look into slavery to give you an answer. Were talking about homosexuality here.

Slavery in Israel was not like the cotton-fields from american history, and perhaps people were treated well while they were slaves?

Be careful, John, this kind of relativism can lead you to support gay marriage...[/quote]

I don't support gay marriage at all.