Homosexuality - Here I stand.

[LightHorseman]

FYI, definition of genocide, so you don't sound so silly ever again...

1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG). Article 2, of this convention defines genocide as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."

 

[JacobHall86]

The studies that have been presented in these forums show gays and lesbians are significantly less likely to be promiscuous than heterosexuals.


None of this changes the fact that there is considerable and very legitimate debate about whether or not being gay is a sin at all. The condemnations in the bible rely on questionable translations that don't hold up to examination and seem to be accepted solely because of political reasons and not for any linguistic reasons

What proof of this do you have? You still have not answered that. Restating something does not make it fact.

I submit that you are lying about there being debate among Christians about this. You can either back up what you have claimed or be proved a liar.

 

[JacobHall86]

And... HE GOES FOR SPECIAL PLEADING! WooHoo! Thats right, its only genocide when it happens to God's people, exterminating masses of humans, men women and children, who are against God's people, unrepentent, or, heck, were just born in the wrong place at the wrong time is perfectly OK! Well he's gotta be happy with that effort, the crowd is still going wild... back to you for the post game show, Ritchie.

He said it was genocide, but that it was done not based on race but because they were in opposition to God. Read closer before you plant a victory flag.

 

[JacobHall86]

No it is a simple statement that the same conviction and biblical justification some Christians use to condemn gays and lesbians is no different from the conviction and biblical justification some Christians have used and some continue to use to condemn people of color.

No, its a red herring. The discussion is on homosexuality, not race. Don't attempt confuse the plights of the gays with the blacks and others who have suffered far greater persecution than being called names and being treated as social outcasts, its demeaning and disrespectful to the heartbreak and trials the blacks went through.

 

[Polycarp1]

What proof of this do you have? You still have not answered that. Restating something does not make it fact.

I submit that you are lying about there being debate among Christians about this. You can either back up what you have claimed or be proved a liar.

Um -- this is a Christian board. People posting in CP&E are Christians. What we're doing is debating.

Q.E.D.

 

[No Swansong]

Oh no Swansong. I was just going to fix that so my post made more sense. Sorry, I'm ill right now too.

No, she was his ex wife at the time we fell in love and met each other. But, technically or biblically, according to the scriptures he should have been reconciled to her or wait for widowhood to get remarried.

However, when we met, there was no way he was going to be reconciled to his first wife. That relationship was over because she wouldn't stop drinking or doing drugs. She died of alcoholic liver disease. When I met her in the hospital she was yellow; she was very jaundiced and wasting away. I met her and kept her cordially in the family because of my husband's daughter who I thought shouldn't be without her Mom even though my husband had legal custody of his daughter because his ex wife was deemed an unfit mother by the courts and my husband had full and sole custody of his daughter. The birth Mom was only allowed 2 to 4 hours a month with her daughter under supervision.

I was just pointing out a biblical technicality if one read that scripture alone, meaning my husband should have been reconciled to his wife biblically or wait to be a widow to get remarried, if that makes sense.

Hope this made more sense, Swansong.

Thanks it does make more sense. Sorry about that.

 

[one11]

Thanks it does make more sense. Sorry about that.

Sure, np.

Hope you are feeling better today!

 

[No Swansong]

Um -- this is a Christian board. People posting in CP&E are Christians. What we're doing is debating.

Q.E.D.

It also should be mentioned that The Episcopal Church, the ELCA, the United Methodist Church, many of the Old Catholic Churches, and even the SBC all have had and have ongoing debate about the subject.

There is indeed much debate regarding homosexuality within the Church.

 

[No Swansong]

Sure, np.

Hope you are feeling better today!

I am thank you for asking. And you?

 

[JacobHall86]

Um -- this is a Christian board. People posting in CP&E are Christians. What we're doing is debating.

Q.E.D.

She makes it seem as though there are credible greek scholars who debate this. If average joe and jane are questioning it without any ability to be a textual critic of worth, thats a joke.

Debate on CF does not mean the Bible is in question.

If the debate she references is one here on CF, her point is garbage.

 

[JacobHall86]

It also should be mentioned that The Episcopal Church, the ELCA, the United Methodist Church, many of the Old Catholic Churches, and even the SBC all have had and have ongoing debate about the subject.

There is indeed much debate regarding homosexuality within the Church.

Proof? Especially the SBC comment.

 

[No Swansong]

Proof? Especially the SBC comment.

Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (Largest Lutheran Synod in U.S.)
Reference here.

The United Methodist Church
Reference here.

Old Catholic
Reference here.


As for the SBC I apologize it was the American Baptist Church I was thinking of. I did not mean to misrepresent.
Reference here.



Do you need a list of accredited Theologians who discuss and debate homosexuality in the Church.

There is indeed ongoing academic debate concerning homosexuality. This doesn't mean that they are right, nor does it mean that Traditional Christianity is wrong but to state that the debate is not ongoing is simply incorrect.

 

[JacobHall86]

Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (Largest Lutheran Synod in U.S.)
Reference here.

The United Methodist Church
Reference here.

Old Catholic
Reference here.


As for the SBC I apologize it was the American Baptist Church I was thinking of. I did not mean to misrepresent.
Reference here.



Do you need a list of accredited Theologians who discuss and debate homosexuality in the Church.

There is indeed ongoing academic debate concerning homosexuality. This doesn't mean that they are right, nor does it mean that Traditional Christianity is wrong but to state that the debate is not ongoing is simply incorrect.

I want to know who is debating that the scriptures were not translated correctly as was claimed, but to further a political agenda, as was claimed.

Also, all of the groups you mentioned are liberal almost-unitarian groups, and its no surprise their stance.

<Staff Edit>

 

[No Swansong]

I want to know who is debating that the scriptures were not translated correctly as was claimed, but to further a political agenda, as was claimed.

I never made that claim thus there is no reason for me to defend it.

Also, all of the groups you mentioned are liberal almost-unitarian groups, and its no surprise their stance.

We would definitely disagree that any of these groups are even remotely unitarian.

Also, that is not the Old Catholic church, its a knock off evil doppelganger church.

Actually in the U.S. there is no Old Catholic Church in communion with the Union of Utrecht. That does not however mean they are not Old Catholic.

 

[one11]

And... HE GOES FOR SPECIAL PLEADING! WooHoo! Thats right, its only genocide when it happens to God's people, exterminating masses of humans, men women and children, who are against God's people, unrepentent, or, heck, were just born in the wrong place at the wrong time is perfectly OK! Well he's gotta be happy with that effort, the crowd is still going wild... back to you for the post game show, Ritchie.

What does this have to do with homosexuality? Or adultery? Or anything for that matter?

 

[david_x]

What does this have to do with homosexuality? Or adultery? Or anything for that matter?

(Power trip)

 

[thesunbeast]

Alright, we always seem to have two extreme views on this. I've given my views on this in extensive details but It doesn't seem to matter. For now on, I'll just give short responses to this question regarding homosexuality, and no doubt will be responded to with huge posts about things I've already touched upon in the past, end therefore would not be worth the energy to touch upon again.

We seem to have two sides that are both incorrect. One side deals with homosexuality not even being a sin and not needing to listen to the Bible other then in simple ways to just have a model for living your life, and denies things like fornication being sinful and what not, abd basically changing rules and what the Bible is saying. They also believe that the matter is about "sinning" or not, and therefore try to justify what is ir isn't "a sin".

The other side is very selective about what Bible quotes to draw attention to and mysteriously leaves others out of the equation. Selective reasoning. Sometimes you take this passage literally, sometimes you take this other passage for it's hidden meaning. Sometimes you say that a pasage applies to only one thing, other times you ay that this passage applies to all that it applies. Sometimes you say that the original hebrew and original Greek has different words, and sometimes the original hebrew and original Greek had the same words. Sometimes you feel like a nut and sometimes you don't.

My well thought out, well understood, nonhypocritical, faithful, rational, and Biblical view is this: Homosexuality is a sin, but that's because fornication, or sex as a whole, is sinful. Homosexuality is just another for of sexual sin in a long line of sexual sins. All forms of sex are equally sinful except for one, and that is sex within marriage. Outside of marriage, homosexual activity is sinful, heterosexual activity is sinful, touching yourself activity is sinful, Adulterous activity is sinful, sex after marriage from a divorse is sinful, ect.. Those are all different kinds of fornication, and it's all sinful. Even looking at another woman or man, before or after marriage, is sinful. Pretty hard not to sin huh? Well, that's because people are putting too much emphesis on not "sinning" (or spreading sin). The issue isn't to not be a sinner, it's to be forgiven of your sin.

 

[cerfam7]

If the Bible is viewed as "The Word of God" then the Bible is to be taken literately. As a Christian the Bible is the source and authority provided to us by our Lord. As far as Homosexuality...the Bible doesnt make being gay any different of a sin as murder, stealing, fornecation, adultury...etc. BUT to justify being gay as OK through the Bible is obserd. The Bible cannot be read as a standard text, Through the Holy Spirirt the words in the scripture define how to live our lives. I pray for you.

 

[RMDY]

If the Bible is viewed as "The Word of God" then the Bible is to be taken literately. As a Christian the Bible is the source and authority provided to us by our Lord. As far as Homosexuality...the Bible doesnt make being gay any different of a sin as murder, stealing, fornecation, adultury...etc. BUT to justify being gay as OK through the Bible is obserd. The Bible cannot be read as a standard text, Through the Holy Spirirt the words in the scripture define how to live our lives. I pray for you.

I am perplexed that people who follow THE WAY of Jesus and take up the banner of Christ proclaim of gospel of abstraction regarding Jesus Christ's sacrifice on the cross and the sin-nature of mankind.

 

[SughaNSpice]

Alright, we always seem to have two extreme views on this. I've given my views on this in extensive details but It doesn't seem to matter. For now on, I'll just give short responses to this question regarding homosexuality, and no doubt will be responded to with huge posts about things I've already touched upon in the past, end therefore would not be worth the energy to touch upon again.

We seem to have two sides that are both incorrect. One side deals with homosexuality not even being a sin and not needing to listen to the Bible other then in simple ways to just have a model for living your life, and denies things like fornication being sinful and what not, abd basically changing rules and what the Bible is saying. They also believe that the matter is about "sinning" or not, and therefore try to justify what is ir isn't "a sin".

You seem to have included a lot of claims that are not accurate here.

What is true is that there is serious academic debate among theologians and experts in Greek about the claim that homosexuality is biblically condemned. What they say has merit and should be looked at honestly and openly

My well thought out, well understood, nonhypocritical, faithful, rational, and Biblical view is this: Homosexuality is a sin, but that's because fornication, or sex as a whole, is sinful. Homosexuality is just another for of sexual sin in a long line of sexual sins. All forms of sex are equally sinful except for one, and that is sex within marriage. Outside of marriage, homosexual activity is sinful, heterosexual activity is sinful, touching yourself activity is sinful, Adulterous activity is sinful, sex after marriage from a divorse is sinful, ect.. Those are all different kinds of fornication, and it's all sinful. Even looking at another woman or man, before or after marriage, is sinful. Pretty hard not to sin huh? Well, that's because people are putting too much emphesis on not "sinning" (or spreading sin). The issue isn't to not be a sinner, it's to be forgiven of your sin.

Biblically fornication (the Greek pornea) means to engage in unlawful sexual activities. But then one is left with defining “unlawful”
The bible is no help here. The bible never condemns polygamy, rape, concubines, the use of sex surrogates and a host of other activities. And adultery is something that involves a married woman,
Strong’s concordance defines the word as: harlotry – sex with a prostitute, adultery – sex with a married woman, incest – sex with a family member and figuratively as idolatry. Which does not lend itself to condemnation of gays.