Forcing the Chruch to accept homosexuality..

[drich0150]

Because it's not the will of God. The OT is a source of wisdom but is not always a commandment. Even when it was a commandment for the Jews thousands of years ago, it's not always a commandment for us today, in fact we are today to take one wife only, we don't impregnate our servant maids to increase the population, we don't annihilate our enemies and so on. The will of God for us is in the latest commandment spelled out by Jesus to love our neighbor, and everything descends from it.

The Old Testament is not the only place where we can find Homosexuality to be called a sin. Paul in 1cor6:9-20 very specifically spells it out, and if you are one who wishes to modify scripture and invalidate the words of Apostle Paul.. Homosexuality can still be defined as a sin. because at it's core it is sex outside the bounds of a sanctified marriage. It is not enough to silence the bible about what it directly says about the sin of Homosexuality.

before you teach a doctrine of permissibility you must show scriptural permissibility. Starting with clear permission for a same sex relationship, or a scriptural example for same sex marriage, or show that sex outside the confines of a sanctified marriage not to be a sin.

Remember I am Looking for book chapter and Verse, not conjecture, or speculation from you or a current or former church official.

As Jesus also explained, evil things comes from the heart of men.So the question is if homosexuality violates the rule of Christian love, and it doesn't, unless it also comes with things like promiscuity, infidelity, or violence (it probably does more often than heterosexuality, but statistics don't change the point); the second question is if homosexuality comes from evil feelings of the heart, but it doesn't, once again it's those things above that do.

Sin, is anything not in the expressed will of God.
Evil, is a malicious intent to sin.(Or as you pointed out it/Jesus said it comes from the Heart.)
Not all sin is evil, but all evil is sin.

Free will is the ability to choose something not in the expressed will of God. In other words free will is the ability to sin.

Free will is not the ability to choose something not in the expressed will of God with out consequence. If you believe this to be the case then show me in scripture where free will is sold as the ability to choose with out dealing with sin.
If their wasn't consequence for being outside of the expressed will of God (Sin) then Jesus would not have had to die for the sins of the world.

...And Again As I have pointed out Sex outside of marriage is a sin, even if the intentions are not evil. This sin like all sin needs to find redemption, not a doctrine of permissibility. Because if God considers it a sin and we do not, do you think God will change his mind for the proud who will not or can not repent of their sin? (If so I need book chapter and verse)

And the church is not bending to popular morality, in fact hating gays is popular morality like hating the Jews or hating the black used to be in the past. The church is just thinking on the matter, like it has always done with other things in the past 2000 years. We are all involved in the discussion, we have not reached the truth, but things will become clear in time, one way or another.

Hating Gays" was popular 75 years ago. perhaps in Italy there are still lynch mobs who drag gay people out of their homes and hang people from oak trees, or there is a secret police that has been given special permission to hunt down all gay people and shoot them on the spot or drag them to "special" camps. If this is the case I can see a need for moderation in the church's stance on how gay people should be approached. But as it is in the rest of the world, identifying homosexual sex is a sin, does not automatically harden the heart of the one who is trying to bring a lost brother to repentance. This sin is One like any other, it need to find redemption.

Otherwise know that the cost of portraying the church as unscripturally tolerant is costing those in sinners, and the majority of us our souls.. And for what? more members? more money to be collected on Sundays? To appeal to the politically correct?

Yes, but perhaps it's not a sin. If it doesn't harm others, if it doesn't violate Jesus commandment, if its forbiddance doesn't descent naturally from the commandment, then it's not a sin. When Jesus said He did not abolish the old law but brought it to completion, it means that He didn't negate that God had instituted some forbiddances or rules to previous people for historical reasons, but that those rules don't exist in a vacuum but must descend from the One Commandment. Ancient Jews could not eat certain food, and that was for their own safety then, but it's not a rule now. Ancient Jews had to increase their numbers or disappear, so everyone was called to multiply offspring, and bi-people were called to choose heterosexuality, but that maybe is not a necessity anymore.

This argument all hinges on the idea that the OT was the only place in the whole of scripture that condemns this behavior. As i have shown this is not the case.

Homosexuality is a sin first and foremost because it has been openly identified as a sin by the Apostle Paul. Secondly, it is to be considered a sin because sex, any sex (Despite orientation) outside the confines of a sanctified marriage is a sin, and again if you are teaching a doctrine of permissibility, then you must show permissibility in scripture. It is not enough to simply silence the bible.

Otherwise know that you or your system of belief holds an unscriptural view of Homosexuality.

We clearly disagree on this. I say that as Christians we are accountable
to God (love, as summarized by Jesus in His final commandment), Jesus Christ (His exemplar life), and the Holy Spirit (which blows in our consciences). Scripture is a source of wisdom but not a manual or a checklist, it must be used with the wisdom of the Commandment in the heart and mind, or it becomes dry and make our hearts hard.

Without the guidance of scripture how can one determine the intentions of the holy Spirit and the self righteousness that accompanies the pride of an "enlightened" religion? Wasn't this the mistake of the Pharisees? (even though it was to the opposite effect.) If you believe in the Holy Spirit I assume you also Believe in the Spirit Inspired word of God. If this is true. Why Would the Holy Spirit of God contradict what He has written in Scripture, just to give you and your a special revelation?

What you are trying to identify (The sin) with your bit on legalism is Pride. Pride does everything you pointed out as witnessed by the Pharisees and generation after generation of foolish Christianity. You should also know that Pride is not confined to legalism, Pride knows no bounds. So even without scripture as your guide, you/me all of us can still succumb to it.

As I have said, how can one determine the voice of the Holy Spirit verse the voice of one's on self righteousness, if not for what was written by the Holy Spirit in scripture? This is why i ask for Book Chapter and Verse. It's not out of a legalistic need to try and buy righteousness through action. I love God with all of my being, and yet will recognize that my own righteousness can get in the way of this love, that is why I seek His will in the bible rather than preach my own.

 

[Archivist]

Why is there a need for liberally minded people to have God or The Whole of Christianity to accept Homosexuality?

Why not just be Gay, and shrug off what the bible or church says?

Why do we have to believe what you believe?

I disagree with what is being stated in the OP because I don't think that most "liberally minded people" are trying to get either "God" or "The Whole of Christianity" or both to "accept Homosexuality."

I do think that many "liberally minded people" are fighting for equal rights for homosexuals, including the right to enter into a civil union or civil marriage. I don't know of any among my homosexual friends who are trying to force the church to solemnize a homosexual marriage. I have seen a few such individuals in the national media, but I don't think that they represent the majority of homosexuals or even a significant minority.

 

[Phinehas2]

Archivist,

I disagree with what is being stated in the OP because I don't think that most "liberally minded people" are trying to get either "God" or "The Whole of Christianity" or both to "accept Homosexuality."

I do think that many "liberally minded people" are fighting for equal rights for homosexuals, including the right to enter into a civil union or civil marriage. I don't know of any among my homosexual friends who are trying to force the church to solemnize a homosexual marriage. I have seen a few such individuals in the national media, but I don't think that they represent the majority of homosexuals or even a significant minority.

Well I know people who are in a civil partnership who do not want to force the church to recognise it as marriage, and in that respect I am delighted for them and their civil partnership, as they don’t know Jesus I fail to see what difference it makes. However the government and pro-gay lobbies are determined to force the church to accept same sex unions as marriage
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/lib-dems-to-vote-on-full-marriage-rights-for-gay-couples-2046695.html

So lets not pretend.

 

[Archivist]

Well I know people who are in a civil partnership who do not want to force the church to recognise it as marriage, and in that respect I am delighted for them and their civil partnership, as they don’t know Jesus I fail to see what difference it makes. However the government and pro-gay lobbies are determined to force the church to accept same sex unions as marriagehttp://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/lib-dems-to-vote-on-full-marriage-rights-for-gay-couples-2046695.html So lets not pretend.

Did you actually read the article that you cited?

The last paragraph clearly says: "Prime Minister David Cameron, writing in the IoS last week, signalled his support for "religious organisations to register same-sex relationships on their premises if they wish to do so" (Emphasis added). The term "allow" is used several other places in the article.

It appears that this proposal would not force churches to solemzize homosexual marriage, although it would allow them to do so. The OP is about forcing churches to accept homosexuality, and allowing is not the same as forcing.

 

[Phinehas2]

Archivist,
Yes I read it all. The pro-gay lobbies have always called it gay marriage, this is just another step. We arent fooled, lets not pretend, if a church refuses the pro-gay lobby will do their usual screeching homophobia.

 

[Phinehas2]

Excellent post by Loopdedoop,

Amen. Matthew 19, together with Gen 2, Mark 10 and Eph 5 clearly describes porneia as being sexual activity outside faithful man woman marriage.
One doesnt need to have the specific condemnations of same sex relations.
The pro-gay arguments just continue to show the depth of unbelief the more they deny every scripture presented.

 

[Archivist]

Archivist,
Yes I read it all. The pro-gay lobbies have always called it gay marriage, this is just another step. We arent fooled, lets not pretend, if a church refuses the pro-gay lobby will do their usual screeching homophobia.

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. However, the facts you offered don't support that opinion. It isn't a matter of "pretending" as you claim.

If you can offer proof please do so. Simply saying "lets not pretend" doesn't cut it.

 

[Araelis]

We should accept that it exists, but is still sinful.
God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah because of things like sodomy and homosexuality. The bible teaches specifically that men are to lie with women. Being gay by itself is not a sin. Some people cannot help it. However, participating in homosexual intercourse and love is wrong. I think basically that they should be abstinent or try to live straight even though they are gay. We cannot force them to adhere by our beliefs, in fact that goes against our teachings. We simply inform them of it then teach them at their own discretion. There are too many wrongs done in the name of God.

 

[ivebeenshown]

As a former homosexual offender, I must say:

It is not that one is 'gay' or 'straight', but that one must first consider an act before it is committed. One who knows God will try their best to not even consider such acts as: Stealing, murder, adultery, homosexuality, lying.

Everyone can 'help it' in regards to all of these things: but not by themselves. God is necessary to facilitate such recuperation.

In regards to the Prop.8 appeal -- I believe that this is necessary for fulfillment of prophecy and would happen one way or another. It is not up to us as followers of Christ to dictate others by man's law -- it is up to us to be willing to die for His witness, should man's law demand blasphemy.

 

[Archivist]

God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah because of things like sodomy and homosexuality.

Really?

Ezekiel 15:49-50 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."

 

[ivebeenshown]

Really?

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."

Leviticus 20: 13 " 'If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

(NIV)

If we look at KJV:

Leviticus 20: 13If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Ezekiel 16: 49Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. 50And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.

One cannot place the destruction of Sodom solely on the acts of homosexuality, but one cannot deny the acts of homosexuality as an included reason.

 

[Araelis]

Really?

Ezekiel 15:49-50 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."

God's Description of the Sodomites

"Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
"Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
"And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet." Romans 1:24-27

 

[Araelis]

Leviticus 20: 13 " 'If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

(NIV)

If we look at KJV:

Leviticus 20: 13If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Ezekiel 16: 49Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. 50And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.

One cannot place the destruction of Sodom solely on the acts of homosexuality, but one cannot deny the acts of homosexuality as an included reason.

I didn't mean to imply that they were only destroyed for this reason. Sorry.

 

[ivebeenshown]

I didn't mean to imply that they were only destroyed for this reason. Sorry.

My post was not directed at yourself, Araelis, but towards Archivist.

I apologize for having allowed such an assumption on your part.

 

[Jase]

Leviticus 20: 13 " 'If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

(NIV)

If we look at KJV:

Leviticus 20: 13If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Ezekiel 16: 49Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. 50And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.

One cannot place the destruction of Sodom solely on the acts of homosexuality, but one cannot deny the acts of homosexuality as an included reason.

Neither of those above verses have anything to do with consentual same-sex relationships. Stop relying on English! The Bible wasn't written in English! Meanings change in different languages.

 

[Jase]

God's Description of the Sodomites

"Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
"Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
"And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet." Romans 1:24-27

Paul's target audience is not homosexuals. The people he's referring to were Christians who returned to Paganism to practice pagan idolism, and as punishment, God exchanged natural relations (heterosexual) for unnatural (homosexual). Same-sex behavior, especially in a ritual manner, was not natural for Paul's audience. Same-sex relations are natural for homosexuals, and there were not enough known homosexuals ( since the concept wasn't invented until the 19th Century) for Paul to justify an entire passage to a tiny tiny minority.

OllieFranz would be the best to clarify, but I also believe Paul's reference was a greek joke based on Plato, that his audience would understand, but we wouldn't.

 

[ivebeenshown]

EDIT:

Jase, let me share with you:

A thief is a thief in his heart before he has committed an act of theft.
A murderer is a murderer in his heart before he has committed an act of murder.
A liar is a liar in his heart before he has told a lie.

Likewise, a homosexual is a homosexual in his heart before he has committed an act of homosexuality.

Homosexuality is not justifiable through God.

As Paul said, the law of Moses makes us conscious of sin, though we are saved by Grace, should we continue to sin that Grace may increase?

 

[Araelis]

Neither of those above verses have anything to do with consentual same-sex relationships. Stop relying on English! The Bible wasn't written in English! Meanings change in different languages.

This is paraphrased from the original text Romans was written in.
1:26 By being confused about their Maker they became confused about themselves; women became snared in a passion for one another.

1:27 Likewise the men became inflamed with an unnatural attraction to men; even their personalities changed in consequence to their sexual perversity.

 

[Jase]

EDIT:

Jase, let me share with you:

A thief is a thief in his heart before he has committed an act of theft.
A murderer is a murderer in his heart before he has committed an act of murder.
A liar is a liar in his heart before he has told a lie.

Likewise, a homosexual is a homosexual in his heart before he has committed an act of homosexuality.

Homosexuality is not justifiable through God.

I disagree. There is no such thing as modern day homosexuality in the Bible. Every single case of same-sex behavior is either - forced, part of pagan sex rituals, or prostitution.

 

[Jase]

This is paraphrased from the original text Romans was written in.
1:26 By being confused about their Maker they became confused about themselves; women became snared in a passion for one another.

1:27 Likewise the men became inflamed with an unnatural attraction to men; even their personalities changed in consequence to their sexual perversity.

1) How do you know that's not referring to heterosexual men and women who developed an unnatural attraction? It's going against one's nature to change your sexuality. That's the point here.

2) I have no clue where you got the paraphrase, but that hardly makes it any more valid.