The multiple responses from BryanW92 are pretty much what I expected from him, judging by his other posts. He assumes that I am gay, which I'm not. I've been happily married for many years, am a father and a grandfather and have never had a homosexual experience in my life. I didn't state this in the OP on purpose, since people such as Bryan would assume from their closed minds that a heterosexual couldn't say such things. So that point has been made: the judgment from such a person is predetermined, just as it was for the priest and Levite who passed by their neighbor.
It may not have been proper for Bryan to assume you were homosexual, but it's no less improper to accuse him of holding to a "predetermined judgment" regarding homosexuality.
Second, God expressedly forbade adultery under the law, yet Jesus forgave the woman who was caught in the act of adultery. Again, Bryan assumes that I approve of adultery which is not only way off topic but also untrue. Again, judgment is made from a judgmental heart and has no basis in fact or truth. We are commanded to love our neighbor -- all our neighbors, not just some of them.
Again, isn't accusing someone of being judgmental also judgmental?
W/r to Jesus forgiving adultery, yes He did. He forgives the believer of ALL sin, be it adultery, lust, hate, homosexual behavior, and even judgmentalism. Forgiving sinful behavior however should not be construed as acceptance of such behavior.
A Rhys quotes Leviticus -- the law -- which has no relevance since Christians have died to the law and are alive in Christ. thesunisout responds similarly. The law has no relevance unless you are a Jew and live under the Old Covenant. If you follow the law of God, not only are you denying Christ but you had better keep all God's commandments. IF you have a ham sandwich you are as guilty in God's eyes under the law as the LGBTs you condemn by the law.
And yet Jesus never annulled the Law. Indeed, His purpose was to
fulfill the Law. Mt 5:17
miamited goes even farther afield, equating love and sex and bringing rape into the discussion. Equating rape and homosexual sex between consenting partners is almost as far from logic and truth as you can get. I say almost because abysmul brings pedophilia into the discussion. Why not compare beastiality with looking at a woman lustfully while you're at it? It is tragic where some let their minds take them.
The tragedy is how a culture can go so far astray as to rationalize sin, to pervert Scripture to their own selfish ends so as to justify behavior God has plainly denounced as sinful. Worse is when that culture contains a growing number of those who call on His Name, who participate in, and even promote the deception.
miamited saves the day in his second post, saying "Love is not sex and sex is not love. Love is caring for and about someone else's well being often over our own. It seems to me that if someone loves another then the last thing they would want is to pull that other person down into the pit with them. Sex is merely one manifestation of love, but only when enjoyed within the context for which God intended it to be shared. Otherwise it's just us seeking to gratify the desires of our flesh." The question is: is it wrong to love somebody of the same sex? I don't care what goes on in the bedrooms of anyone else, whether they're gay or not. (What goes on in the bedrooms of "straight" people? Is it always "conventional" (biblical) intercourse? Give me a break!!)
The discussion about homosexual behavior has nothing to do with love or emotion.
Homosexual behavior is nothing more than gross self indulgence. It is a sin like any other sin in the sense that it's wrong in God's eyes.
Homosexual behavior does not define a relationship any more than sex defines the heterosexual relationship. It is an act, a physical act. And while God *DOES* sanction the physical act between a husband and his wife, He has never sanctioned sex between two members of the same gender. Never.
Appeals to "love" - the "love" that may exist between two men or two women are easily dismissed as rationale for arguing therefore that sex between them is therefore somehow sanctioned by God. They're nonsense. If sex between two men or two women is an abomination to God - and God is clear on that matter - then whatever "love" that may exist between two men or two women as would drive them to engage in an abominable act in God's eyes is, by all logic equally abominable. So the "love" argument is a sham and a deception as well.
Again, if people love others of the same gender, why are some so quick to judge them and condemn them to hell while remaining silent about other sins that are far more destructive to society? Who is guilty of the greater sin? (Hint: Jesus didn't condemn the woman caught in adultery, but her judges left in shame and humiliation.)
"Love" for the same gender I addressed above.
The argument that there are "far more destructive sins" than homosexuality might, albeit with great difficulty, *might* have a kernel of truth to it - IF God viewed sin in terms of degree. Unfortunately, He doesn't. Sin is sin, and even the slightest sin is sufficient to send us to eternal damnation so that argument is pointless.
W/r to the adulterous woman, I addressed that above - that Jesus didn't condemn her in no ways means He condoned her behavior. In fact, if you read what He said immediately after saying "neither do I condemn you" was "go, and
sin no more."
Homosexual behavior - sex between two people of the same gender is a sin. God considers such behavior abominable. Such behavior will not permit those who engage in it to inherit the kingdom of God. I Cor 6:9.
Is it right to condemn those who engage in such behavior? No, certainly not. But we need to speak the truth, and speak it in love. Such behavior is sinful - as are all other behaviors God has told us are sinful. And we all sin. But if we're not permitted to call sin 'sin,' and are judged and condemned with even greater ferocity, and even ridiculed for calling this particular sin 'sin' (as the world has always been wont to do), then who are the truly phobic people?
And please, stay on topic if you can.
The thread title is "Homophobes." That word refers to people who fear homosexuals, but is more commonly used as a pejorative against those who speak out against homosexuality. The OP seems to apply to the latter. Is that indeed the topic of this thread?
