Haven't You Moved Pass Leviticus?

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]Agreed. Hiding, running, ashamed, all took a toll on me until I accepted the way God made me. Never looked back, and have never been happier. The evilness of Satan hasn't returned.[/SIZE]

Isa 5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

2Ti 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;​

 

[ILove2Worship]

The old Law has been abolished. Why do you keep quoting Leviticus for "proof" homosexality is a sin?
That was an idolatry/cult practice condemned anyways.

Romans 7:6-

6But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.

I have moved way past Leviticus I have moved into 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 my friend! Its a sin whether you read it in Leviticus or in 1 Corinthians there is no way around it!

 

[Ave Maria]

If we must follow the Leviticus laws on homosexuality then we must also follow the Leviticus laws on mixed clothing and eating certain seafood.

 

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]If we must follow the Leviticus laws on homosexuality then we must also follow the Leviticus laws on mixed clothing and eating certain seafood.[/SIZE]

The dietary laws were abrogated several places in the N.T. And the mixed clothing was prohibited becasue only the priests could do so. Since the temple has been desgtroyed and the Levitical priesthood no longer exists tht particular no longer applies.

But in case you haven't noticed the injunction against same sex fornication is reiterated in the N.T.

 

[Ave Maria]

The dietary laws were abrogated several places in the N.T. And the mixed clothing was prohibited becasue only the priests could do so. Since the temple has been desgtroyed and the Levitical priesthood no longer exists tht particular no longer applies.

But in case you haven't noticed the injunction against same sex fornication is reiterated in the N.T.

Actually, same sex fornication is not condemned in the NT. Only fornication in general is condemned.

 

[RMDY]

If we must follow the Leviticus laws on homosexuality then we must also follow the Leviticus laws on mixed clothing and eating certain seafood.

Jesus already told us what was "clean" and "unclean."

 

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]Actually, same sex fornication is not condemned in the NT. Only fornication in general is condemned.[/SIZE]

Actually you do not know what your are talking about, in this instance. You haven't even once presented anything resembling a discussion of anything posted. Is this your best shot, a oneliner saying, "I'm right, and you're wrong?"

The early church interpreted [size=+1]αρσενοκοιτης[/size]/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. The ECF did NOT even mention pagan temples and/or religions activities in these citations and did NOT limit the condemnation of homosexual acts to a pagan temple context!

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][/b].

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​

 

[eastcoast_bsc]

Actually you do not know what your are talking about, in this instance. You haven't even once presented anything resembling a discussion of anything posted. Is this your best shot, a oneliner saying, "I'm right, and you're wrong?"


The early church interpreted [SIZE=+1]αρσενοκοιτης[/SIZE]/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. The ECF did NOT even mention pagan temples and/or religions activities in these citations and did NOT limit the condemnation of homosexual acts to a pagan temple context!

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][/b].​

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​

Dear Herr kennen es aller: Regarding Homosexuality

The issue has been a subject of contention within modern Jewish denominations and has led to debate and division. The prevalent view among Jews has been to regard homosexual intercourse as sinful, arguing that it is categorically forbidden by the Torah. This remains the current view of Orthodox Judaism, but not of Reconstructionist Judaism and Reform Judaism. Conservative Judaism's Committee on Jewish Law and Standards, which until December 2006 held the same position as Orthodoxy, recently revised its position, permitting multiple viewpoints under its philosophy of pluralism.

So I guess it depends on which Jewish web site you copy and paste from

 

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]Dear Herr kennen es aller: Regarding Homosexuality

[SIZE=-1]The issue has been a subject of contention within modern Jewish denominations and has led to debate and division. The prevalent view among Jews has been to regard homosexual intercourse as sinful, arguing that it is categorically forbidden by the Torah. This remains the current view of Orthodox Judaism, but not of Reconstructionist Judaism and Reform Judaism. Conservative Judaism's Committee on Jewish Law and Standards, which until December 2006 held the same position as Orthodoxy, recently revised its position, permitting multiple viewpoints under its philosophy of pluralism.[/SIZE]

So I guess it depends on which Jewish web site you copy and paste from[/SIZE]

Actually you are making a false accusation. I quoted credible resources, the Talmud and the Jewish Encyclopedia NOT a website of any kind.

I have highlighted in red the ONLY part of this post worth reading. And it says exactly what I have been saying, from the time of Moses, ca. 3200 years +/-, the orthodox Jewish scholars have interpreted the scriptures as condemning ALL homosexual acts, under ALL circumstances, at ALL times; by ALL persons, male and female; in ALL places, NO exceptions.

I have no interest in some Johnny come lately decision a committee I never heard of made in December 2006, or every Jim Jones, David Koresh, Joe Smith, Charles Russell, Reconstructionist, Reform, revisionist hoohah that comes down the line.

 

[Der Alte]

***bump***

 

[RMDY]

Actually, same sex fornication is not condemned in the NT. Only fornication in general is condemned.

You contradicted yourself:

Actually, same sex fornication is not condemned in the NT.

Only fornication in general is condemned.

- Rob

 

[davedjy]

You contradicted yourself:



- Rob

That isn't a contradiction, actually all those post statements line up. ROFL!

 

[RMDY]

That isn't a contradiction, actually all those post statements line up. ROFL!

I believe it is fornication, even to those homosexuals who consider themselves to be in a marriage with the same sex. I don't recognize same-sex marriage as a form of marriage.

 

[mont974x4]

Actually I am back to Leviticus now, having finished reading cover to cover last year in the NASB I started again a few weeks ago using the NKJV.


However that is neither here nor there, sexual immorality is considered a sin in the NT as well, altho the consequences are diferent (thanfully we are no longer supposed to stone one another) however it could lead to the unrepentant to be cast out the church.

We are exorted to deny our flesh and walk in the Spirit..put to death the natural man.


God has such things so much better for us than the temporary pleasure of a moment of carnal indulgance....no matter sin we are talking about.

 

[davedjy]

Actually I am back to Leviticus now, having finished reading cover to cover last year in the NASB I started again a few weeks ago using the NKJV.


However that is neither here nor there, sexual immorality is considered a sin in the NT as well, altho the consequences are diferent (thanfully we are no longer supposed to stone one another) however it could lead to the unrepentant to be cast out the church.

We are exorted to deny our flesh and walk in the Spirit..put to death the natural man.


God has such things so much better for us than the temporary pleasure of a moment of carnal indulgance....no matter sin we are talking about.

Sexual immorality is not homosexuality, you haven't proved that by your post. 1 Cor 6:9 is a false translation, Romans 1 and Leviticus are idolatry and prostitution violations.

 

[mont974x4]

You're argument isn't with me but God and His Word. IN any of threads on this issue there have been posted passages and definitions of the original words that make it clear that homosexuality is wrong, just as heterosexual sexual immorality is wrong.

1Co 6:9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals,
1Co 6:10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.
I don't see how anyone can honestly say this is a false translation.


Regardless, marriage is a man/woman institution and any sex outside of that is sin....whether it be gay or straight.


Rom 1:24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them.
Rom 1:25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
Rom 1:26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural,
Rom 1:27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

Regardless of the historical context it is still a degrading passion.



We are called to die to our flesh, our natural man should be put away as we put on Christ. This is applicable to all sin and should in no way be used to just bash gays but to encourage us all to live rightly.


As to Leviticus, chapter 18 is a command to avoid those sexually immoral acts and not about idolotry.


Those arguments are red herrings and an effort to make the Scriptures fit personal views when our personal views should be molded to fit Scripture.

 

[davedjy]

You're argument isn't with me but God and His Word. IN any of threads on this issue there have been posted passages and definitions of the original words that make it clear that homosexuality is wrong, just as heterosexual sexual immorality is wrong.

1Co 6:9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals,
1Co 6:10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.
I don't see how anyone can honestly say this is a false translation.


Regardless, marriage is a man/woman institution and any sex outside of that is sin....whether it be gay or straight.


Rom 1:24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them.
Rom 1:25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
Rom 1:26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural,
Rom 1:27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

Regardless of the historical context it is still a degrading passion.



We are called to die to our flesh, our natural man should be put away as we put on Christ. This is applicable to all sin and should in no way be used to just bash gays but to encourage us all to live rightly.


As to Leviticus, chapter 18 is a command to avoid those sexually immoral acts and not about idolotry.


Those arguments are red herrings and an effort to make the Scriptures fit personal views when our personal views should be molded to fit Scripture.

Yes it is, if you did some research you might understand.

http://gaychurch.org/Gay_and_Christian_YES/calling_the_rainbow_nation_home/7b_gac_clobber%20passages_the_levitical_law.htm


1 Cor 6:9 is a false translation of a Greek Word. Research, so that you can hold debate points, a lot of things I say, I tiredlessly have to repeat, read threads here.

 

[mont974x4]

I have researched the verse. I may have incorrectly lumped all sexual sin into the term sexual immorality, but it was merely a time saving technique. We can not deny that they are all pretty well covered in that verse and no amount of twisting will get Scripture to justify any sexual sin.

 

[davedjy]

I have researched the verse. I may have incorrectly lumped all sexual sin into the term sexual immorality, but it was merely a time saving technique. We can not deny that they are all pretty well covered in that verse and no amount of twisting will get Scripture to justify any sexual sin.

AGAIN, homosexuality as one's innate sexual constitution is not condemned once in the original Hebrew, and Greek language of the Scriptures. Translators have taken it upon themselves to falsely translate the word "homosexual" into the Bible.

Justify sexual sin? there are multitudes of Christian Churches that AFFIRM Gay and lesbian people for who they are!

 

[ReformedChapin]

AGAIN, homosexuality as one's innate sexual constitution is not condemned once in the original Hebrew, and Greek language of the Scriptures. Translators have taken it upon themselves to falsely translate the word "homosexual" into the Bible.

Justify sexual sin? there are multitudes of Christian Churches that AFFIRM Gay and lesbian people for who they are!

Again, your subjective interpretation doesn't pass 2000 of condemnation of homosexual sin and if you think that by attacking individuals character you will changer their position you are sadly mistaken.