Clement of Alexander did not condemn loving homosexual monogamous relationships

[davedjy]

Jude 1:6-7

This scripture is mentioned because it is still used on occasion against homosexuality by those who interpret the words "strange flesh" to infer homosexuality. This is a speculative leap at best! Nowhere do we see any reference to homosexuality. Instead these Scriptures, and their related cross-references, make it abundantly clear that the “strange flesh” being discussed here relates to spiritual beings having sexual relations with physical beings. In addition, those of us who are gay would quickly point out that making love with others of our own sex is what is natural for us. Conversely, sexual relations with the opposite sex is the "strange" and “unnatural” act for us.

 

[davedjy]

rom the time Moses delivered the law, to the Israelites, ca. 1200 BC, until the present, Jewish scholars interpreted the O.T. scriptures as condemning ALL same gender sex acts; by ALL persons, male and female; at ALL times, in ALL places, and under ALL circumstances, NO exceptions or exclusions. The early church fathers also interpreted the N.T. scriptures as condemning ALL homosexual acts, with NO exceptions or exclusions.

Your links do not prove ANYTHING except a TIRED OLD doctrinal belief, and do not hold water as for the be-all, end all on this subject.

 

[Der Alte]

J[SIZE=-1]ude 1:6-7

This scripture is mentioned because it is still used on occasion against homosexuality by those who interpret the words "strange flesh" to infer homosexuality. This is a speculative leap at best! Nowhere do we see any reference to homosexuality. Instead these Scriptures, and their related cross-references, make it abundantly clear that the “strange flesh” being discussed here relates to spiritual beings having sexual relations with physical beings. In addition, those of us who are gay would quickly point out that making love with others of our own sex is what is natural for us. Conversely, sexual relations with the opposite sex is the "strange" and “unnatural” act for us.[/SIZE]

Slanted homosexual pipe dream.

Jud 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

Jud 1:7 ως 5613 ADV σοδομα 4670 N-NPN και 2532 CONJ γομορρα 1116 N-NSF και 2532 CONJ αι 3588 T-NPF περι 4012 PREP αυτας 846 P-APF πολεις 4172 N-NPF τον 3588 T-ASM ομοιον 3664 A-ASM τουτοις 5125 D-DPM τροπον 5158 N-ASM εκπορνευσασαι 1608 V-AAP-NPF και 2532 CONJ απελθουσαι 565 V-2AAP-NPF οπισω 3694 ADV σαρκος 4561 N-GSF ετερας 2087 A-GSF προκεινται4295 V-PNI-3P δειγμα1164 N-ASN πυρος4442 N-GSN αιωνιου166 A-GSN δικην1349 N-ASF υπεχουσαι5254 V-PAP-NPF ​

The verbs translated “giving themselves over to fornication” i.e. εκπορνευσασαι and “going after,” i.e. απελθουσαι are AAP and 2AAP, respectively, aorist, active, participles, an action began in the past, continuing into the future.

God knew about the cumulative sins, the “outlaw porn,*” of Sodom when he was talking with Abraham, at Mamre, before he went down to Sodom. Gen 13:13, Gen 18:20-26, The perverts of Sodom were prevented from doing anything against the angels, by blindness, and certainly did not do anything with any flesh afterward. Gen 19:24ff.

Robertson Word Pictures in the N.T. -- Jud 1:7 {Even as} (\ως\). Just "as." The third instance (Jude passes by the deluge) in Jude, the cities of the plain. {The cities about them} (\hai peri autas poleis\). These were also included, Admah and Zeboiim (De 29:23; Ho 11:8). Zoar, the other city, was spared. {In like manner} (\ton homoion tropon\). Adverbial accusative (cf. \ως\). Like the fallen angels. {Having given themselves over to fornication} (\ekporneusasai\). First aorist active participle feminine plural of \ekporneu“\, late and rare compound (perfective use of \ek\, *outside the moral law), only here in N.T., but in LXX (Ge 38:24; Ex 34:15f., etc.).​

 

[davedjy]

Slanted homosexual pipe dream.

Jud 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

Jud 1:7 ως 5613 ADV σοδομα 4670 N-NPN και 2532 CONJ γομορρα 1116 N-NSF και 2532 CONJ αι 3588 T-NPF περι 4012 PREP αυτας 846 P-APF πολεις 4172 N-NPF τον 3588 T-ASM ομοιον 3664 A-ASM τουτοις 5125 D-DPM τροπον 5158 N-ASM εκπορνευσασαι 1608 V-AAP-NPF και 2532 CONJ απελθουσαι 565 V-2AAP-NPF οπισω 3694 ADV σαρκος 4561 N-GSF ετερας 2087 A-GSF προκεινται4295 V-PNI-3P δειγμα1164 N-ASN πυρος4442 N-GSN αιωνιου166 A-GSN δικην1349 N-ASF υπεχουσαι5254 V-PAP-NPF ​

The verbs translated “giving themselves over to fornication” i.e. εκπορνευσασαι and “going after,” i.e. απελθουσαι are AAP and 2AAP, respectively, aorist, active, participles, an action began in the past, continuing into the future.

God knew about the cumulative sins, the “outlaw porn,*” of Sodom when he was talking with Abraham, at Mamre, before he went down to Sodom. Gen 13:13, Gen 18:20-26, The perverts of Sodom were prevented from doing anything against the angels, by blindness, and certainly did not do anything with any flesh afterward. Gen 19:24ff.

Robertson Word Pictures in the N.T. -- Jud 1:7 {Even as} (\ως\). Just "as." The third instance (Jude passes by the deluge) in Jude, the cities of the plain. {The cities about them} (\hai peri autas poleis\). These were also included, Admah and Zeboiim (De 29:23; Ho 11:8). Zoar, the other city, was spared. {In like manner} (\ton homoion tropon\). Adverbial accusative (cf. \ως\). Like the fallen angels. {Having given themselves over to fornication} (\ekporneusasai\). First aorist active participle feminine plural of \ekporneu“\, late and rare compound (perfective use of \ek\, *outside the moral law), only here in N.T., but in LXX (Ge 38:24; Ex 34:15f., etc.).​

That has to do with the raping of the angels.

Have a way to prove me wrong?

Strange flesh = heteros (Greek) = another flesh, another type.

That isn't talking about ALL homosexual acts, and it is rape at best even if it wasn't the angels. This proves NOTHING about loving, monogamous, same sex relationships.

YOU FAIL.

 

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]Your links do not prove ANYTHING except a TIRED OLD doctrinal belief, and do not hold water as for the be-all, end all on this subject.[/SIZE]

That is right the ONLY correct Biblical doctrinal belief of the church from the time of Moses through at least the first 300 years of the church. Your self contradicting copy/paste from homosexuals-я-us.com® certainly doesn't hold any water at all.

 

[davedjy]

That is right the ONLY correct Biblical doctrinal belief of the church from the time of Moses through at least the first 300 years of the church. Your self contradicting copy/paste from homosexuals-я-us.com® certainly doesn't hold any water at all.

At least I quote mulitiple scholars for my findings, and you haven't refuted them on the least level.

1. You have yet to prove that there is a viable translation of the word "homosexual".

2. You have yet to prove that Jesus or the Apostles condemn ALL loving, monogamous same sex relationships besides quoting your same one line, old doctrinal link.

3. You have yet to prove that "Sodomy" (homosexual sex) is forbidden, by the use of the Scriptures with the original language. The old Leviticus laws are not present day laws. Romans 7:6 makes it clear that the old law has been ABOLISHED. Abomination = tow'ebah = ritual impurity.

 

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]That has to do with the raping of the angels.

Have a way to prove me wrong?

Strange flesh = heteros (Greek) = another flesh, another type.

That isn't talking about ALL homosexual acts, and it is rape at best even if it wasn't the angels. This proves NOTHING about loving, monogamous, same sex relationships.

YOU FAIL.[/SIZE]

You might understand something if you could force yourself to read anything but slanted copy paste from homosexual websites. Jude says ABSOLUTELY nothing about homosexual rape. If you think you are capable try reading what I posted. It explains everything.

God spoke about Sodom's sins in chap. 13 and 18, before he sent the angels down, chap. 19. Jude used specific language to say the outlaw porn began in the past and continued into the future, before any angels.

 

[davedjy]

You might understand something if you could force yourself to read anything but slanted copy paste from homosexual websites. Jude says ABSOLUTELY nothing about homosexual rape. If you think you are capable try reading what I posted. It explains everything.

God spoke about Sodom's sins in chap. 13 and 18, before he sent the angels down, chap. 19. Jude used specific language to say the outlaw porn began in the past and continued into the future, before any angels.

That is a myth. The city was DESTROYED BEFORE the act with the angels was attempted. Furthermore you lose on the account that homosexuality is a documented orientation found in 450+ Vertebrate species.

Your myth about Genesis is again, FALSE, and based upon your lack of knowledge of the Scriptures, and lack of education, yet shown AGAIN.

MYTH #2: The Old Testament teaches that God destroyed an entire city because of homosexuality.

FACT: Even a cursory reading of the story of Sodom in Genesis 18 &19 makes this myth ludicrous. First of all, in Genesis Chapter 18, God appears to have decided to destroy the city before the infamous "homosexual" act with angels was attempted.

However, God promised Abraham that He would not destroy the city if there were at least 10 righteous people (gender is not specified) living within its city limits (Gen 18:32). The fact that the city was destroyed means that not even 10 righteous people, male or female, could be found. To assume that every remaining person was a homosexual is absurd. In Chapter 19, verses 4 and 5, we are told that "the men of the city, the men of Sodom, surrounded the house, both young and old, all the people from every quarter; and they called to Lot and said to him, ‘Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out that we may know them.’" The NRSV says "the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house. The idea that every single man in the entire city was a homosexual is preposterous.

Furthermore, in over 40 references to Sodom in the Scriptures, not one of these makes specific reference to homosexuality. If homosexuality were the "sin of Sodom," you would think that there would be at least one! In fact, there is one very specific reference to what Sodom’s sin actually was: Ezekiel 16:49,50 says, "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen" (NIV). If homosexuality was the "sin of Sodom," this was Ezekiel’s perfect opportunity to declare that fact and he blew it!

http://www.opendoorcenter.com/myths_&_facts.htm

 

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]At least I quote mulitiple scholars for my findings, and you haven't refuted them on the least level.

1. You have yet to prove that there is a viable translation of the word "homosexual".

2. You have yet to prove that Jesus or the Apostles condemn ALL loving, monogamous same sex relationships besides quoting your same one line, old doctrinal link.

3. You have yet to prove that "Sodomy" (homosexual sex) is forbidden, by the use of the Scriptures with the original language. The old Leviticus laws are not present day laws. Romans 7:6 makes it clear that the old law has been ABOLISHED. Abomination = tow'ebah = ritual impurity.[/SIZE]

You don't quote "scholars," you quote homosexual websites. You don't even know the difference

This is EVIDENCE! The early church interpreted αρσενοκοιτης/arsenokoités [1 Cor 6:9] variously as,

• “sodomy,”
• “filth of sodomy,”
• ”lawless lust,”
• “lust,”
• “impurity,”
• “works of the flesh,”
• “carnal,”
• “lawless intercourse,”
• “shameless,”
• “burning with insane love for boys,”
• “licentiousness,”
• “co-habitors with males,”
• “lusters after mankind
• “monstrosities,” etc.​

Quoted from;

• Ignatius, 30-107 AD;
• Polycarp 65 - 155 AD;
• Irenaeus, 120-202 AD;
• Theophilus, 115 - 181 AD;
• Clement of Alexandria, 153 - 217 AD;
• Tertullian, 145-220 AD;
• Cyprian, 200-258 AD; and
• Origen, 185-254 AD.​

Note the dates, of these writings, extend from ca. 50 AD through 258 AD, more than 250 years. The early church fathers interpreted the scriptures as condemning ALL homosexuals acts; by ALL persons, male and female; in ALL places, under ALL circumstance, at ALL times, NO exceptions.

The ECF did NOT even mention, and did NOT limit the condemnation of homosexual acts to, “homosexual rape,” “temple prostitution,” pagan temples and/or religious activities!

Epistle Of Ignatius [Disciple of John] To The Ephesians [A.D. 30-107.]

But as to the practice of magic, or the impure love of boys, or murder, it is superfluous to write to you, since such vices are forbidden to be committed even by the Gentiles. I do not issue commands on these points as if I were an apostle; but, as your fellow-servant, I put you in mind of them.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.v.html

Epistle of Polycarp [Disciple of John] to the Philippians Chapter V.-The Duties of Deacons, Youths, and Virgins. [65 - 155 AD]

In like manner, let the young men also be blameless in all things, being especially careful to preserve purity, and keeping themselves in, as with a bridle, from every kind of evil. For it is well that they should be cut off from the lusts that are in the world, since "every lust warreth against the spirit; " and "neither fornicators, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, shall inherit the kingdom of God, [1 Cor 6:9] " nor those who do things inconsistent and unbecoming.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.iv.ii.html

Irenaeus [Disciple of Polycarp]Against Heresies Book V [120-202 AD]

So also he who has continued in the aforesaid works of the flesh, being truly reckoned as carnal, because he did not receive the Spirit of God, shall not have power to inherit the kingdom of heaven. As, again, the same apostle [Paul] testifies, saying to the Corinthians, "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not err," he says: "neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor revilers, nor rapacious persons, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And these ye indeed have been; but ye have been washed, but ye have been sanctified, but ye have been justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God." [1 Cor 6:9].

Since, therefore, in that passage [1 Cor 6:9] he [Paul] recounts those works of the flesh which are without the Spirit, which bring death [upon their doers],

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.ix.html


Theophilus to Autolycus Book III [115 - 181 AD]
Chapter VI.-Other Opinions of the Philosophers.

And these things the other laws of the Romans and Greeks also prohibit. Why, then, do Epicurus and the Stoics teach incest and sodomy, with which doctrines they have filled libraries, so that from boyhood this lawless intercourse is learned?

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.iv.ii.iii.html

Clement of Alexandria The Instructor. [Paedagogus.] Book III [153 - 217 AD]

The fate of the Sodomites was judgment to those who had done wrong, instruction to those who hear. The Sodomites having, through much luxury, fallen into uncleanness, practicing adultery shamelessly, and burning with insane love for boys; the All-seeing Word, whose notice those who commit impieties cannot escape, cast His eye on them. . . .Accordingly, the just punishment of the Sodomites became to men an image of the salvation which is well calculated for men.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.vi.iii.iii.html

Clement of Alexandria Exhortation To The Heathen

And what are the laws? “Thou shalt not kill; thou shalt not commit adultery; thou shalt not seduce boys; thou shalt not steal; thou shalt not bear false witness; thou shalt love the Lord thy God.” And the complements of these are those laws of reason and words of sanctity which are inscribed on men’s hearts: “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself; to him who strikes thee on the cheek, present also the other;” “thou shalt not lust, for by lust alone thou hast committed adultery.”

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.vi.ii.html

Clement of Alexandria The Instructor [Paedagogus] Book 1

But life has reached this pitch of licentiousness through the wantonness of wickedness, and lasciviousness is diffused over the cities, having become law. Beside them women stand in the stews, offering their own flesh for hire for lewd pleasure, and boys, taught to deny their sex, act the part of women. Luxury has deranged all things; it has disgraced man. A luxurious niceness seeks everything, attempts everything, forces everything, coerces nature. Men play the part of women, and women that of men, contrary to nature; women are at once wives and husbands: no passage is closed against libidinousness; [i.e. every possible body orifice is used for “lechery”/“libidinousness.”] and their promiscuous lechery is a public institution, and luxury is domesticated.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.vi.iii.i.html

Clement of Alexandria The Instructor - Pedagogos Book 3
Chapter 3
Against Men Who Embellish Themselves

Such was predicted of old, and the result is notorious: the whole earth has now become full of fornication and wickedness. I admire the ancient legislators of the Romans: these detested effeminacy of conduct; and the giving of the body to feminine purposes, contrary to the law of nature, they judged worthy of the extremest penalty, according to the righteousness of the law.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.vi.iii.iii.html

Tertullian On Modesty [145-220 AD]
Chapter XVI.-General Consistency of the Apostle.

Just as, again, among all other crimes-nay, even before all others-when affirming that "adulterers, and fornicators, and effeminates, and co-habitors with males, will not attain the kingdom of God, [1 Cor 6:9]" he premised, "Do not err" -to wit, if you think they will attain it. But to them from whom "the kingdom" is taken away, of course the life which exists in the kingdom is not permitted either. Moreover, by superadding, "But such indeed ye have been; but ye have received ablution, but ye have been sanctified, in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God;" [1 Cor 6:9]

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf04.iii.viii.html

Tertullian The Chaplet, or De Corona. Chapter VI.

Demanding then a law of God, you have that common one [law] prevailing all over the world, engraven on the natural tables to which the apostle too is wont to appeal, as when in respect. of the woman's veil he says, "Does not even Nature teach you? " -as when to the Romans, affirming that the heathen do by nature those things which the law requires, he suggests both natural law and a law-revealing nature. Yes, and also in the first chapter of the epistle [Rom 1.] he authenticates nature, when he asserts that males and females changed among themselves the natural use of the creature into that which is unnatural, by way of penal retribution for their error. [Rom 1:27]

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf03.iv.vi.html

Tertullian VII. On Modesty.[sup]1[/sup] Chapter IV.-Adultery and Fornication Synonymous.

Accordingly, among us, secret connections as well-connections, that is, not first professed in presence of the Church-run risk of being judged akin to adultery and fornication; nor must we let them, if thereafter woven together by the covering of marriage, elude the charge. But all the other frenzies of passions-impious both toward the bodies and toward the sexes-beyond the laws of nature, we banish not only from the threshold, but from all shelter of the Church, because they are not sins, but monstrosities.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf04.iii.viii.html

Cyprian Treatise XII Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews [200-258 AD]

65. That all sins are put away in baptism.

In the first Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians: "Neither fornicators, nor those who serve idols, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor the lusters after mankind, nor thieves, nor cheaters, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers, shall obtain the kingdom of God. And these things indeed ye were: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God." [1 Cor 6:9].

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf05.iv.v.xii.html

Origen Against Celsus Book 8 [185-254 AD] [student of Clement of Alexandria]

and that they often exhibit in their character a high degree of gravity, of purity, and
integrity; while those who call themselves wise have despised these virtues, and have wallowed in the filth of sodomy, in lawless lust, “men with men working that which is unseemly.” [Rom 1:27]

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf04.vi.ix.viii.html​

 

[davedjy]

You don't quote "scholars," you quote homosexual websites. You don't even know the difference

This is EVIDENCE! The early church interpreted αρσενοκοιτης/arsenokoités [1 Cor 6:9] variously as,

• “sodomy,”
• “filth of sodomy,”
• ”lawless lust,”
• “lust,”
• “impurity,”
• “works of the flesh,”
• “carnal,”
• “lawless intercourse,”
• “shameless,”
• “burning with insane love for boys,”
• “licentiousness,”
• “co-habitors with males,”
• “lusters after mankind
• “monstrosities,” etc.​

Quoted from;

• Ignatius, 30-107 AD;
• Polycarp 65 - 155 AD;
• Irenaeus, 120-202 AD;
• Theophilus, 115 - 181 AD;
• Clement of Alexandria, 153 - 217 AD;
• Tertullian, 145-220 AD;
• Cyprian, 200-258 AD; and
• Origen, 185-254 AD.​

Note the dates, of these writings, extend from ca. 50 AD through 258 AD, more than 250 years. The early church fathers interpreted the scriptures as condemning ALL homosexuals acts; by ALL persons, male and female; in ALL places, under ALL circumstance, at ALL times, NO exceptions.

The ECF did NOT even mention, and did NOT limit the condemnation of homosexual acts to, “homosexual rape,” “temple prostitution,” pagan temples and/or religious activities!

Epistle Of Ignatius [Disciple of John] To The Ephesians [A.D. 30-107.]

But as to the practice of magic, or the impure love of boys, or murder, it is superfluous to write to you, since such vices are forbidden to be committed even by the Gentiles. I do not issue commands on these points as if I were an apostle; but, as your fellow-servant, I put you in mind of them.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.v.html

Epistle of Polycarp [Disciple of John] to the Philippians Chapter V.-The Duties of Deacons, Youths, and Virgins. [65 - 155 AD]

In like manner, let the young men also be blameless in all things, being especially careful to preserve purity, and keeping themselves in, as with a bridle, from every kind of evil. For it is well that they should be cut off from the lusts that are in the world, since "every lust warreth against the spirit; " and "neither fornicators, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, shall inherit the kingdom of God, [1 Cor 6:9] " nor those who do things inconsistent and unbecoming.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.iv.ii.html

Irenaeus [Disciple of Polycarp]Against Heresies Book V [120-202 AD]

So also he who has continued in the aforesaid works of the flesh, being truly reckoned as carnal, because he did not receive the Spirit of God, shall not have power to inherit the kingdom of heaven. As, again, the same apostle [Paul] testifies, saying to the Corinthians, "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not err," he says: "neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor revilers, nor rapacious persons, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And these ye indeed have been; but ye have been washed, but ye have been sanctified, but ye have been justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God." [1 Cor 6:9].

Since, therefore, in that passage [1 Cor 6:9] he [Paul] recounts those works of the flesh which are without the Spirit, which bring death [upon their doers],

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.ix.html


Theophilus to Autolycus Book III [115 - 181 AD]
Chapter VI.-Other Opinions of the Philosophers.

And these things the other laws of the Romans and Greeks also prohibit. Why, then, do Epicurus and the Stoics teach incest and sodomy, with which doctrines they have filled libraries, so that from boyhood this lawless intercourse is learned?

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.iv.ii.iii.html

Clement of Alexandria The Instructor. [Paedagogus.] Book III [153 - 217 AD]

The fate of the Sodomites was judgment to those who had done wrong, instruction to those who hear. The Sodomites having, through much luxury, fallen into uncleanness, practicing adultery shamelessly, and burning with insane love for boys; the All-seeing Word, whose notice those who commit impieties cannot escape, cast His eye on them. . . .Accordingly, the just punishment of the Sodomites became to men an image of the salvation which is well calculated for men.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.vi.iii.iii.html

Clement of Alexandria Exhortation To The Heathen

And what are the laws? “Thou shalt not kill; thou shalt not commit adultery; thou shalt not seduce boys; thou shalt not steal; thou shalt not bear false witness; thou shalt love the Lord thy God.” And the complements of these are those laws of reason and words of sanctity which are inscribed on men’s hearts: “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself; to him who strikes thee on the cheek, present also the other;” “thou shalt not lust, for by lust alone thou hast committed adultery.”

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.vi.ii.html

Clement of Alexandria The Instructor [Paedagogus] Book 1

But life has reached this pitch of licentiousness through the wantonness of wickedness, and lasciviousness is diffused over the cities, having become law. Beside them women stand in the stews, offering their own flesh for hire for lewd pleasure, and boys, taught to deny their sex, act the part of women. Luxury has deranged all things; it has disgraced man. A luxurious niceness seeks everything, attempts everything, forces everything, coerces nature. Men play the part of women, and women that of men, contrary to nature; women are at once wives and husbands: no passage is closed against libidinousness; [i.e. every possible body orifice is used for “lechery”/“libidinousness.”] and their promiscuous lechery is a public institution, and luxury is domesticated.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.vi.iii.i.html

Clement of Alexandria The Instructor - Pedagogos Book 3
Chapter 3
Against Men Who Embellish Themselves

Such was predicted of old, and the result is notorious: the whole earth has now become full of fornication and wickedness. I admire the ancient legislators of the Romans: these detested effeminacy of conduct; and the giving of the body to feminine purposes, contrary to the law of nature, they judged worthy of the extremest penalty, according to the righteousness of the law.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.vi.iii.iii.html

Tertullian On Modesty [145-220 AD]
Chapter XVI.-General Consistency of the Apostle.

Just as, again, among all other crimes-nay, even before all others-when affirming that "adulterers, and fornicators, and effeminates, and co-habitors with males, will not attain the kingdom of God, [1 Cor 6:9]" he premised, "Do not err" -to wit, if you think they will attain it. But to them from whom "the kingdom" is taken away, of course the life which exists in the kingdom is not permitted either. Moreover, by superadding, "But such indeed ye have been; but ye have received ablution, but ye have been sanctified, in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God;" [1 Cor 6:9]

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf04.iii.viii.html

Tertullian The Chaplet, or De Corona. Chapter VI.

Demanding then a law of God, you have that common one [law] prevailing all over the world, engraven on the natural tables to which the apostle too is wont to appeal, as when in respect. of the woman's veil he says, "Does not even Nature teach you? " -as when to the Romans, affirming that the heathen do by nature those things which the law requires, he suggests both natural law and a law-revealing nature. Yes, and also in the first chapter of the epistle [Rom 1.] he authenticates nature, when he asserts that males and females changed among themselves the natural use of the creature into that which is unnatural, by way of penal retribution for their error. [Rom 1:27]

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf03.iv.vi.html

Tertullian VII. On Modesty.[sup]1[/sup] Chapter IV.-Adultery and Fornication Synonymous.

Accordingly, among us, secret connections as well-connections, that is, not first professed in presence of the Church-run risk of being judged akin to adultery and fornication; nor must we let them, if thereafter woven together by the covering of marriage, elude the charge. But all the other frenzies of passions-impious both toward the bodies and toward the sexes-beyond the laws of nature, we banish not only from the threshold, but from all shelter of the Church, because they are not sins, but monstrosities.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf04.iii.viii.html

Cyprian Treatise XII Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews [200-258 AD]

65. That all sins are put away in baptism.

In the first Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians: "Neither fornicators, nor those who serve idols, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor the lusters after mankind, nor thieves, nor cheaters, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers, shall obtain the kingdom of God. And these things indeed ye were: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God." [1 Cor 6:9].

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf05.iv.v.xii.html

Origen Against Celsus Book 8 [185-254 AD] [student of Clement of Alexandria]

and that they often exhibit in their character a high degree of gravity, of purity, and
integrity; while those who call themselves wise have despised these virtues, and have wallowed in the filth of sodomy, in lawless lust, “men with men working that which is unseemly.” [Rom 1:27]

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf04.vi.ix.viii.html​

You don't quote "scholars," you quote homosexual websites. You don't even know the difference

Apparently, YOU don't know the difference, because there are lots of Scholars in the article links I provided!

Your old Church writings are DOCTRINAL BELIEFS, and not the end-all, be all, your anti-homosexuals r us Website, proves nothing except an interpretation of Scripture.

 

[davedjy]

Romans 1

It is interesting, to say the least, that despite homosexuality being looked on as the "vilest of sins," as it is so often referred to, Jesus never mentioned it! Furthermore, as was already mentioned, the words "homosexual" or "homosexuality" did not exist in the original Greek and Aramaic languages of the New Testament. There are only three passages of Scripture in the N.T. which have been cited in reference to homosexuality. The first is Romans, Chapter 1. In this passage, the Apostle Paul gives a very specific list of characteristics describing those in question: He describes them as those who once knew God, but who chose not to honor God as God. Instead, they worshiped material images of human beings, birds, animals, and reptiles as objects of worship rather than the One True Living God. We are told that they were filled with EVERY kind of wickedness, evil, covetousness, and malice. They were full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, craftiness, gossip, slander, insolence, haughtiness, and boastfulness. They were inventors of evil, rebellious toward parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, and ruthless. (NRSV) As a result of their total depravity, God turned them over to complete spiritual ruin, so that they left no stone of sexual debauchery unturned, engaging in mass orgies and idolatrous sexual cult worship, which included both homosexual and heterosexual debauchery.

These murderous, malicious people who worshiped idols and hated God after once knowing Him, have NOTHING to do with people who have a sincere desire to love and worship the Lord Jesus Christ and who happen to be homosexual. Today, there are multitudes of homosexual people who are tirelessly yearning to be a part of the Church so that they can WORSHIP the One True Living God and profess Jesus as their Savior. Anyone who can possibly equate the monstrous, reprobate people of Romans 1 to modern-day gay and lesbian people who reach out to humanity, love and respect their parents, and who have been expelled from the church they love, just for being homosexual, is not using common sense! Like those religious leaders who scorned Jesus, they have chosen to believe lies founded on their traditions.

In fact, rather than Romans 1 being intended as a warning to gay and lesbian people, its actual purpose is revealed in the first verse of Chapter 2, where Paul rebukes his readers for passing judgment on others! The entire First Chapter of Romans was given to rebuke those who were being judgmental so as to "despise the riches of God’s kindness and forbearance and patience," forgetting that it is God’s kindness that leads men and women to repentance" (Romans 2:4). In other words, while many Christians use Romans Chapter 1 as a means of clobbering gay and lesbian people, the truth is that this chapter was actually written to rebuke those original readers for being so self-righteous and finger-pointing, that they forgot just how forbearing and gentle God was toward them! In their vindictive, finger-pointing, self-righteous preaching, they were forgetting that "all have sinned (missed the mark) and fall short of the glory of God," (Romans 3:23) including themselves! No one who has truly humbled himself or herself, and acknowledged his or her own missing of the mark, can ever point a finger of judgment at someone else.

http://www.opendoorcenter.com/myths_&_facts.htm

 

[davedjy]

2. Call-boys
"I sat amazed as I heard the Bible being invoked in ways that were wholly inappropriate to any canons of biblical scholarship. Perhaps something snapped in me...for better or worse I decided somebody needed to provide resources that would give both clarity and honesty." -- Robbin Scroggs.
Robbin Scroggs feels that arsenokoitai refers to a man who uses the services of "call-boys", and that malakoi refers to those "call-boys". In his book, "The New Testament and Homosexuality", Scroggs writes, "If the malakos points to the effeminate call-boy, then the arsenokoites in this context must be the active partner who keeps the malakos as a 'mistress' or who hires him on occasion to satisfy his sexual desires. No more than molakos is to be equated with the youth in general, the eromenos, can arsenokoites be equated with the adult in general, the erastes" (pg. 108).

The Jerusalem Bible, German 1968, agrees with Scroggs, translating arsenokoitai as "child molesters". Of course, fundamentalists ignore that bible translation [as well as Phillips (1958), Jerusalem Bible (French -1955), The Latin Vulgate, (405), etc., of which reject the homosexual interpretation] while accepting the NIV (which is unclear since it has the translation "homosexual offenders").
Note: The Dutch NBG translation of 1951 uses the word "schandjongens" ("maleprostitutes" in English) for malakoi and "knapenschenders" ("boy-molesters" in English) for arsenokotai.

Rembert Truluck is a Doctor of Theology from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, KY, 1968. He was a Southern Baptist Pastor from 1953 to 1973, and a Professor of Religion at Baptist College of Charleston, SC, from1973 to 1981. Truluck is well learned in Hebrew and Greek. In his article "The Six Bible Passages Used To Condemn Homosexuals", Dr. Truluck writes, "The Greek word [arsenokoitai] translated "homosexual" does not mean homosexual! The word is obscure and uncertain."
Dr. Truluck personally wrote a letter to me, in responce to mine, in which he writes: ".... [arsenokoitai] was never translated as "homosexual" until 1946, and was a bad mistake then."
Jeramy Townsley says that "It seems clear that arsenokoites [arsenokoitai] does not refer to mutually respecting gay relationships..." Learned in Greek and Hebrew, Jeramy received a MA. in philosophy/theology from Lincoln Christian College Seminary.
".... The term appears only in contexts dealing with greed, prostitution, adultery, idolatry, and lack of self control. Although it is a rare term, its use is probably best connected with those male prostitutes who are clearly condemned in the Old Testament, and who would fit in with those temptations which drew Paul's audience toward idolatry and greed, whether they were tempted to become such prostitutes or take advantage of their services.

You don't quote "scholars," you quote homosexual websites. You don't even know the difference

2 Scholars in that alone, proves YOU aren't paying attention to my debate points and backings!

http://home.wanadoo.nl/inspiritus/The%20Mystery.htm

 

[Der Alte]

. . .

[SIZE=-1]Rembert Truluck is a Doctor of Theology from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, KY, 1968. He was a Southern Baptist Pastor from 1953 to 1973, and a Professor of Religion at Baptist College of Charleston, SC, from1973 to 1981. Truluck is well learned in Hebrew and Greek. In his article "The Six Bible Passages Used To Condemn Homosexuals", Dr. Truluck writes, "The Greek word [arsenokoitai] translated "homosexual" does not mean homosexual! The word is obscure and uncertain."
Dr. Truluck personally wrote a letter to me, in responce to mine, in which he writes: ".... [arsenokoitai] was never translated as "homosexual" until 1946, and was a bad mistake then."
Jeramy Townsley says that "It seems clear that arsenokoites [arsenokoitai] does not refer to mutually respecting gay relationships..." Learned in Greek and Hebrew, Jeramy received a MA. in philosophy/theology from Lincoln Christian College Seminary.
".... The term appears only in contexts dealing with greed, prostitution, adultery, idolatry, and lack of self control. Although it is a rare term, its use is probably best connected with those male prostitutes who are clearly condemned in the Old Testament, and who would fit in with those temptations which drew Paul's audience toward idolatry and greed, whether they were tempted to become such prostitutes or take advantage of their services.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]2 Scholars in that alone, proves YOU aren't paying attention to my debate points and backings![/SIZE]

You are the one not paying attention. You still have not quoted any scholars! What you have done is copy junque from a homosexual website that claims to be what some guy said, NOT the primary sources.

You don't have a clue if either of the so-called scholars even exist, or if they do did they actually say what is quoted. Posting 2d-3d hand quotes supposedly from "scholars" is NOT evidence.

The fact that someone may claim to have a degree from some school or other does not make them an authority on anything. I can buy a PhD any day online.

If these guys are considered authorities, it needs to be proven. Where do they teach? What books have they written on this topic? Has anything they have written ever been peer reviewed?

This stuff you quoted, where was it written? When was it written? What is the name of the book and the publisher so someone can verify the citations and get more information? Was the writings this stuff was allegedly taken from peer reviewed?

All you got is homosexual graffiti from a homosexual website. NOT scholars, NOT evidence! And as I said you don't even know the difference.

Pick up any legitmate book on any scholarly topic, see if legitmate scholars quote things without giving name of the book or publication, publication date, publishers name and location, and page numbers. No credible scholar just says, "This guy with a PhD said 'something or other.'"

Now go find some real evidence.

 

[UberLutheran]

Liberals taking text out of context...why am I not surprised?

Conservatives taking it upon themselves to speak for others -- whether or not what conservatives are saying is grounded in reality -- and then holding others accountable for things they didn't say... why am I not surprised?

 

[Brieuse]

You don't quote "scholars," you quote homosexual websites. You don't even know the difference

This is EVIDENCE! The early church interpreted αρσενοκοιτης/arsenokoités [1 Cor 6:9] variously as,

• “sodomy,”
• “filth of sodomy,”
• ”lawless lust,”
• “lust,”
• “impurity,”
• “works of the flesh,”
• “carnal,”
• “lawless intercourse,”
• “shameless,”
• “burning with insane love for boys,”
• “licentiousness,”
• “co-habitors with males,”
• “lusters after mankind
• “monstrosities,” etc.​

Quoted from;

• Ignatius, 30-107 AD;
• Polycarp 65 - 155 AD;
• Irenaeus, 120-202 AD;
• Theophilus, 115 - 181 AD;
• Clement of Alexandria, 153 - 217 AD;
• Tertullian, 145-220 AD;
• Cyprian, 200-258 AD; and
• Origen, 185-254 AD.​

Note the dates, of these writings, extend from ca. 50 AD through 258 AD, more than 250 years. The early church fathers interpreted the scriptures as condemning ALL homosexuals acts; by ALL persons, male and female; in ALL places, under ALL circumstance, at ALL times, NO exceptions.

The ECF did NOT even mention, and did NOT limit the condemnation of homosexual acts to, “homosexual rape,” “temple prostitution,” pagan temples and/or religious activities!

Epistle Of Ignatius [Disciple of John] To The Ephesians [A.D. 30-107.]

But as to the practice of magic, or the impure love of boys, or murder, it is superfluous to write to you, since such vices are forbidden to be committed even by the Gentiles. I do not issue commands on these points as if I were an apostle; but, as your fellow-servant, I put you in mind of them.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.v.html

Epistle of Polycarp [Disciple of John] to the Philippians Chapter V.-The Duties of Deacons, Youths, and Virgins. [65 - 155 AD]

In like manner, let the young men also be blameless in all things, being especially careful to preserve purity, and keeping themselves in, as with a bridle, from every kind of evil. For it is well that they should be cut off from the lusts that are in the world, since "every lust warreth against the spirit; " and "neither fornicators, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, shall inherit the kingdom of God, [1 Cor 6:9] " nor those who do things inconsistent and unbecoming.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.iv.ii.html

Irenaeus [Disciple of Polycarp]Against Heresies Book V [120-202 AD]

So also he who has continued in the aforesaid works of the flesh, being truly reckoned as carnal, because he did not receive the Spirit of God, shall not have power to inherit the kingdom of heaven. As, again, the same apostle [Paul] testifies, saying to the Corinthians, "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not err," he says: "neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor revilers, nor rapacious persons, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And these ye indeed have been; but ye have been washed, but ye have been sanctified, but ye have been justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God." [1 Cor 6:9].

Since, therefore, in that passage [1 Cor 6:9] he [Paul] recounts those works of the flesh which are without the Spirit, which bring death [upon their doers],

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.ix.html


Theophilus to Autolycus Book III [115 - 181 AD]
Chapter VI.-Other Opinions of the Philosophers.

And these things the other laws of the Romans and Greeks also prohibit. Why, then, do Epicurus and the Stoics teach incest and sodomy, with which doctrines they have filled libraries, so that from boyhood this lawless intercourse is learned?

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.iv.ii.iii.html

Clement of Alexandria The Instructor. [Paedagogus.] Book III [153 - 217 AD]

The fate of the Sodomites was judgment to those who had done wrong, instruction to those who hear. The Sodomites having, through much luxury, fallen into uncleanness, practicing adultery shamelessly, and burning with insane love for boys; the All-seeing Word, whose notice those who commit impieties cannot escape, cast His eye on them. . . .Accordingly, the just punishment of the Sodomites became to men an image of the salvation which is well calculated for men.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.vi.iii.iii.html

Clement of Alexandria Exhortation To The Heathen

And what are the laws? “Thou shalt not kill; thou shalt not commit adultery; thou shalt not seduce boys; thou shalt not steal; thou shalt not bear false witness; thou shalt love the Lord thy God.” And the complements of these are those laws of reason and words of sanctity which are inscribed on men’s hearts: “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself; to him who strikes thee on the cheek, present also the other;” “thou shalt not lust, for by lust alone thou hast committed adultery.”

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.vi.ii.html

Clement of Alexandria The Instructor [Paedagogus] Book 1

But life has reached this pitch of licentiousness through the wantonness of wickedness, and lasciviousness is diffused over the cities, having become law. Beside them women stand in the stews, offering their own flesh for hire for lewd pleasure, and boys, taught to deny their sex, act the part of women. Luxury has deranged all things; it has disgraced man. A luxurious niceness seeks everything, attempts everything, forces everything, coerces nature. Men play the part of women, and women that of men, contrary to nature; women are at once wives and husbands: no passage is closed against libidinousness; [i.e. every possible body orifice is used for “lechery”/“libidinousness.”] and their promiscuous lechery is a public institution, and luxury is domesticated.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.vi.iii.i.html

Clement of Alexandria The Instructor - Pedagogos Book 3
Chapter 3
Against Men Who Embellish Themselves

Such was predicted of old, and the result is notorious: the whole earth has now become full of fornication and wickedness. I admire the ancient legislators of the Romans: these detested effeminacy of conduct; and the giving of the body to feminine purposes, contrary to the law of nature, they judged worthy of the extremest penalty, according to the righteousness of the law.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.vi.iii.iii.html

Tertullian On Modesty [145-220 AD]
Chapter XVI.-General Consistency of the Apostle.

Just as, again, among all other crimes-nay, even before all others-when affirming that "adulterers, and fornicators, and effeminates, and co-habitors with males, will not attain the kingdom of God, [1 Cor 6:9]" he premised, "Do not err" -to wit, if you think they will attain it. But to them from whom "the kingdom" is taken away, of course the life which exists in the kingdom is not permitted either. Moreover, by superadding, "But such indeed ye have been; but ye have received ablution, but ye have been sanctified, in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God;" [1 Cor 6:9]

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf04.iii.viii.html

Tertullian The Chaplet, or De Corona. Chapter VI.

Demanding then a law of God, you have that common one [law] prevailing all over the world, engraven on the natural tables to which the apostle too is wont to appeal, as when in respect. of the woman's veil he says, "Does not even Nature teach you? " -as when to the Romans, affirming that the heathen do by nature those things which the law requires, he suggests both natural law and a law-revealing nature. Yes, and also in the first chapter of the epistle [Rom 1.] he authenticates nature, when he asserts that males and females changed among themselves the natural use of the creature into that which is unnatural, by way of penal retribution for their error. [Rom 1:27]

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf03.iv.vi.html

Tertullian VII. On Modesty.[sup]1[/sup] Chapter IV.-Adultery and Fornication Synonymous.

Accordingly, among us, secret connections as well-connections, that is, not first professed in presence of the Church-run risk of being judged akin to adultery and fornication; nor must we let them, if thereafter woven together by the covering of marriage, elude the charge. But all the other frenzies of passions-impious both toward the bodies and toward the sexes-beyond the laws of nature, we banish not only from the threshold, but from all shelter of the Church, because they are not sins, but monstrosities.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf04.iii.viii.html

Cyprian Treatise XII Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews [200-258 AD]

65. That all sins are put away in baptism.

In the first Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians: "Neither fornicators, nor those who serve idols, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor the lusters after mankind, nor thieves, nor cheaters, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers, shall obtain the kingdom of God. And these things indeed ye were: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God." [1 Cor 6:9].

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf05.iv.v.xii.html

Origen Against Celsus Book 8 [185-254 AD] [student of Clement of Alexandria]

and that they often exhibit in their character a high degree of gravity, of purity, and
integrity; while those who call themselves wise have despised these virtues, and have wallowed in the filth of sodomy, in lawless lust, “men with men working that which is unseemly.” [Rom 1:27]

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf04.vi.ix.viii.html​

You're going to have to take Clement of Alexander out of those links.

 

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]You're going to have to take Clement of Alexander out of those links.[/SIZE]

The answer my friend is blowing in the wind. The answer is blowing in the wind.

You have NOT proven anythng about Clement or any of the other church fathers and you NEVER will. The only thing you have demonstrated is you do not have a clue what "in context" means. You post 2-3 sentences from a few hundred pages of 3 different writings, ignore ALL the accompanying text and claim that those 2-3 sentences represent all Clement said.

Even dave and his link to homosexuals-я-us.com® admit that Clement condemned homosexuality and call him "homophobic."

Clement of ALexandtria on homosexuality according to another gay site.

Clement of Alexandria was a major early Church father. He addressed sexuality in some detail. In this chapter of his work Paidogogus, he discusses effeminate men and masculine women. He is clearly hostile. Nevertheless the passage is interesting for a number of reasons:

Clement gives a lot of information about pathic homosexual activity.
Although he discusses men for the most part, he includes a discussion of female homosexuality as well. There is no question that he has in mind some general notion of "homosexuality" here.

Clement also seems to discuss lesbian marriages.

The last two points play a major role in Bernadette Brooten's book, Love Between Women, (Chicago: 1996). Brooten argues that the marriages referred to by Clement were a real Egyptian social custom, although this is controversial. The book is required for those interested in the period.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/clem-ped-3-3.html​

 

[davedjy]

Now go find some real evidence.

Your one link does not prove anything as far as "real evidence" is concerned. The best Scholar in the world is no more qualified to look at a passage differently, than the University educated people I posted.
The truth does not lie!
There isn't any viable translation of the word "homosexual", in the Hebrew and Greek in the Bible and homosexuality as one's innate sexual constitution is not condemned in ANY of the Scriptures. Your doctrinal "interpretations" are no more credible than mine. My testimony with the CORRECT theology is all the proof I need. You can teach false doctrine all you want, but the truth will ALWAYS win out.

A Gay Worship Leader's fallen marriage, and vast social anxiety problems is AGAIN yet another example of why a gay person cannot live as a heterosexual successfully.
I am OFF welfare, and ALL of my social anxiety and stomach problems are gone, since I found a gay and lesbian affirming Church.
Plenty of them exist and they are growing. NEW LIGHT Presbyterians, there are also Catholics and Methodists, partial list of the 628 Churches in California that are gay and lesbian affirming:


Church of the Epiphany Agoura Hills Episcopal

First Christian Church Alameda Disciples of Christ
Trinity Lutheran Church Alameda Lutheran
First Congregational Alameda UCC

Albany UMC Albany UMC

St. Mark's Episcopal Church Altadena Episcopal
Christ the Shepherd Lutheran Church Altadena Lutheran
Altadena Community Church Altadena UCC

St. Andrew's Antelope Episcopal

Peace in the Valley Christian Church Apple Valley Alliance of Christian Churches
St. Timothy's Episcopal Church Apple Valley Episcopal

St. Andrew Presbyterian Church Aptos Presbyterian
Aptos Community UMC Aptos UMC

Arcadia Congregational Church Arcadia UCC

St. Alban's Arcata Episcopal

St. Barnabas' Episcopal Church Arroyo Grande Episcopal

St. Luke's Episcopal Church Atascadero Episcopal
Community Church of Atascadero Atascadero UCC

St. Luke's Auburn Episcopal
New Faith Community Church Auburn UCC

MCC of the Harvest Bakersfield MCC

First Presbyterian Church Baldwin Park Presbyterian

St. Agnes Episcopal Church Banning Episcopal

First Congregational Barstow UCC

St. Stephen's Episcopal Church Beaumont Episcopal

Calvary Open Door Center Bellflower Non-denominational

Good Shepherd Belmont Episcopal
St. Luke's Belmont Episcopal
Congregational Church of Belmont, UCC Belmont UCC

St. Stephen's Church Belvedere Episcopal

St. Andrew's Episcopal Church Ben Lomond Episcopal

St. Paul's Benicia Episcopal
Community Congregational Church Benicia UCC

First Baptist Church of Berkeley Berkeley Baptist
Newman Hall/Holy Spirit Roman Catholic Church Berkeley Catholic
BRIM Berkeley Disciples of Christ
University Christian Church Berkeley Disciples of Christ
All Souls' Berkeley Episcopal
Good Shepherd Berkeley Episcopal
St. Mark's Berkeley Episcopal
Shepherd of the Hills Lutheran Church Berkeley Lutheran, ELCA
University Lutheran Chapel Berkeley Lutheran, ELCA
New Spirit Community Church Berkeley MCC, Disciples of Christ, UCC
St. John's Presbyterian Church Berkeley Presbyterian
First Congregational Berkeley UCC
New Fellowship UCC Berkeley UCC
New Spirit Community Church Berkeley UCC
Epworth UMC Berkeley UMC
Trinity UMC Berkeley UMC
Wesley Foundation, Univ. of CA at Berkeley Berkeley UMC

All Saints' Beverly Hills Episcopal

St. Paul's Burlingame Episcopal

St. Luke's Calistoga Episcopal

St. Columba's Camarillo Episcopal

St. Paul's Cambria Episcopal

The Episcopal Church in Campbell Campbell Episcopal
Holy Spirit Campbell Episcopal
First UMC Campbell UMC

St. John's the Baptist Capitola Episcopal

St. Patrick Carlsbad Catholic
All Saints Old Roman Catholic Church Carlsbad Catholic, Independent
Pilgrim Congregational Carlsbad UCC

All Saints' Carmel Episcopal
St. Dunstan's Carmel Episcopal

St. George's Carmichael Episcopal

Our Lady of Grace Castro Valley Catholic
Holy Cross Episcopal Church Castro Valley Episcopal

MCC of the Coachella Valley Cathedral City MCC

Congregational Church Chico UCC
Chico Trinity United Methodist Church Chico UMC

Our Lady of the Assumption Claremont Catholic
Mother of Good Counsel Claremont Catholic
St. Ambrose Claremont Episcopal
Claremont Presbyterian Claremont Presbyterian
Claremont UCC, Congregational Claremont UCC
Claremont UMC Claremont UMC

Clayton Valley Presbyterian Clayton Valley Presbyterian

United Church of Cloverdale Cloverdale UCC

St. Mark's University Parish Coleta Catholic

First Christian Church Concord Disciples of Christ
Diablo Valley Metropolitan Community Church Concord MCC

Peace Lutheran Church Corona Lutheran, ELCA
Free Spirit MCC Corona MCC




***The only ones I see here arguing the most, are probably gay themselves.***

 

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]Your one link does not prove anything as far as "real evidence" is concerned. The best Scholar in the world is no more qualified to look at a passage differently, than the University educated people I posted.

The truth does not lie!

There isn't any viable translation of the word "homosexual", in the Hebrew and Greek in the Bible and homosexuality as one's innate sexual constitution is not condemned in ANY of the Scriptures. Your doctrinal "interpretations" are no more credible than mine. My testimony with the CORRECT theology is all the proof I need. You can teach false doctrine all you want, but the truth will ALWAYS win out.[/SIZE]
*irrelevant laundry list of erring "churches" omitted.*

What you still fail to understand is you have NEVER quoted a single scholar on any topic here. And the truly sad part is. You don't even know the difference. You keep posting quotes from a homosexual website that lists some alleged statements and the names of anonymous people, who may or may not exist, may or may not have any relevant qualifications, and who may or may not have said what is posted.

Who are these guys, when did they write, where did they write, etc. Alleged statements without the orginal sources are meaningless.

I have proven with irrefutable, credible, verifiable historical evidence that the ancient jews and the early church clearly had words to describe homosexuality.

According to you there are 450 animal species which are allegedly born homosexual, etc. If that is true then modern homosexuals did not invent it, mankind has known about homosexuality since the beginning, and they had words to describe it.

I quoted a gay website that states that Clement of Alexandria wrote about Lesbian marriage, in the 2d century.

I quoted Dan Wallace who has taught PhD level Greek since 1978. I quoted him directly from his own writings. You quoted a website that mentioned some guy named Truluck, who may or may not exist, and may or may not have some kind of degree, and may or may not have said what was posted.

Having a degree means very little. I can buy a PhD online any day for a few hundred dollars. And having a degree in Theology does not make someone an expert in Biblical Hebrew or Greek, those are specific disciplines.

A Proctologist and a Brain Surgeon are both MDs, but I would not go to a proctologist for brain surgery. Although there are some people for whom that is necessary.

The truth will always win out, when are you going to post some?

 

[Brieuse]

You're wrong again. You've taken his chapter and injected your own thoughts and feelings into it. In context, ie including the entire chapter and not a couple of lines like you have done, he is clearly condemning some sort of actions that are no longer practised today.

" “Come, youngster, buy for yourself a man,”"
"when he was being sold"
"I pity the boys possessed by the slave-dealers"
"have intercourse with a son that has debauched himself"
"These things your wise laws allow: people may sin legally; and the execrable indulgence in pleasure they call a thing indifferent. They who commit adultery against nature think themselves free from adultery. Avenging justice follows their audacious deeds, and, dragging on themselves inevitable calamity, they purchase death for a small sum of money"


In the examples he used to explain his case, which allows a person to understand the point and subject of what he is trying to teach in that subjext, you have used it to condemn all homosexuals which is CLEARLY not his purpose here.

 

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]You're wrong again. You've taken his chapter and injected your own thoughts and feelings into it. In context, ie including the entire chapter and not a couple of lines like you have done, he is clearly condemning some sort of actions that are no longer practised today.

" “Come, youngster, buy for yourself a man,”"
"when he was being sold"
"I pity the boys possessed by the slave-dealers"
"have intercourse with a son that has debauched himself"
"These things your wise laws allow: people may sin legally; and the execrable indulgence in pleasure they call a thing indifferent. They who commit adultery against nature think themselves free from adultery. Avenging justice follows their audacious deeds, and, dragging on themselves inevitable calamity, they purchase death for a small sum of money"

In the examples he used to explain his case, which allows a person to understand the point and subject of what he is trying to teach in that subjext, you have used it to condemn all homosexuals which is CLEARLY not his purpose here.[/SIZE]

Seeing they do not see. Hearing they do not hear.

You accuse me of quoting out of context "a couple of lines." I quoted paragraphs and highlighted text within those paragraphs. Three of your cut/pastes are not even complete sentences. And what do you think, "They who commit adultery against nature. . ." means? If you were to actually read Clement you would find that his different chapters deal with different topics, and each has a chapter head which summarizes the topic.

And once again, at least, two homosexual websites contradict your solitary, personal perversion of Clement.

Challenge for you, find me a homosexual website that agrees with you about Clement.