Homosexuality from a christian point of veiw.

[outlaw]

I'm sorry if you feel that I am disrespectful because I disagree with you.

Homosexual sex is a sin. It is outside God's will for the way He wants His creation to live. People who twist and turn the Holy Scriptures to make Them fit the way they want to live, and to satisfy the selfish desires of their hearts, and doing just that: The are trying to make Scripture conform to them, rather than they conform to Scripture.

I see so many here twisting and turning scripture in order to justify their own personal prejudice and justify discrimination against gays and lesbians.

 

[Kgreg]

I see so many here twisting and turning scripture in order to justify their own personal prejudice and justify discrimination against gays and lesbians.

Homosexual sex is outside of God's will for His people, as is all sex outside of marriage, and He's only provided for marriage between a man and a woman. I'm know that this can be rough to hear, but it's the truth. Living within God's will is much more rewarding than pleasure of hot gay sex.

 

[sethad]

Homosexual sex is outside of God's will for His people, as is all sex outside of marriage, and He's only provided for marriage between a man and a woman. I'm know that this can be rough to hear, but it's the truth. Living within God's will is much more rewarding than pleasure of hot gay sex.

what about hot heterosexual sex? is God against that too?

 

[outlaw]

Homosexual sex is outside of God's will for His people, as is all sex outside of marriage, and He's only provided for marriage between a man and a woman.

Levirate marriage is within God’s will

The name of this type of marriage is derived from the Latin word "levir," which means "brother-in-law." This involved a woman who was widowed without having borne a son. She would be required to leave her home, marry her brother-in-law, live with him, and engage in sexual relations. The woman would have to endure what was essentially serial rapes with her former brother-in-law as perpetrator. Their first-born son was considered to be sired by the deceased husband. In Genesis 38:6-10, Tamar's husband Er was killed by God for unspecified sinful behavior. Er's brother, Onan, was then required by custom to marry Tamar. Not wanting to have a child who would not be consider his, he engaged in an elementary (and quite unreliable) method of birth control: coitis interruptus. God appears to have given a very high priority to the levirate marriage obligation. Being very displeased with Onan's behavior, God killed him as well. Ruth 4 reveals that a man would be required to enter into a levirate marriage not only with his late brother's widow, but with a widow to whom he was the closest living relative.



Gen 21:10 shows that concubines are A-OKAY with God.



Numbers 31:1-18 Deuteronomy 21:11-14 indicate tahth married men can rape female prisoners of war.





Kind of throws a monkey wrench into your exclusion argument.

I'm know that this can be rough to hear, but it's the truth. Living within God's will is much more rewarding than pleasure of hot gay sex.

Personally I think being honest is better than pretending to be something one is not.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

... Dale B. Martin Arsenokoités and Malakos: Meanings and Consequences 1996 Westminster John Knox Press

Writing a book does not make one God.

You make keep the unrecognized gay adovcate, I'll stick to scripture that has been tested and shown true as is.

 

[Kgreg]

Levirate marriage is within God’s will[/font][/color][/size]

The name of this type of marriage is derived from the Latin word "levir," which means "brother-in-law." This involved a woman who was widowed without having borne a son. She would be required to leave her home, marry her brother-in-law, live with him, and engage in sexual relations. The woman would have to endure what was essentially serial rapes with her former brother-in-law as perpetrator. Their first-born son was considered to be sired by the deceased husband. In Genesis 38:6-10, Tamar's husband Er was killed by God for unspecified sinful behavior. Er's brother, Onan, was then required by custom to marry Tamar. Not wanting to have a child who would not be consider his, he engaged in an elementary (and quite unreliable) method of birth control: coitis interruptus. God appears to have given a very high priority to the levirate marriage obligation. Being very displeased with Onan's behavior, God killed him as well. Ruth 4 reveals that a man would be required to enter into a levirate marriage not only with his late brother's widow, but with a widow to whom he was the closest living relative.



Gen 21:10 shows that concubines are A-OKAY with God.



Numbers 31:1-18 Deuteronomy 21:11-14 indicate tahth married men can rape female prisoners of war.





Kind of throws a monkey wrench into your exclusion argument.


Personally I think being honest is better than pretending to be something one is not.

Still living according to the OT. Very well then.

 

[spinto]

Homosexual sex is outside of God's will for His people, as is all sex outside of marriage, and He's only provided for marriage between a man and a woman. I'm know that this can be rough to hear, but it's the truth. Living within God's will is much more rewarding than pleasure of hot gay sex.

It is not outside God's Will. Outside Christian law maybe.... If God has only provided for marriage between man and woman, than homosexuality would not exsits--my marriage would not exist. And, it does... I don't think God plays games--certainly not with me. I am not his pawn on his chess board. I am his friend and part of the whole that is Divinity. The love that I have to give is pure. And sharing that love with someone whom I TRUELY love is a pure way to rejoice in Divinity. It is real and it is good.

Some closet gay guy with his head stuck in a Bible, praying over himself, hoping for a change, forcing himself to marry a woman, is what I call a sin. It is a sin of a self-obsorbed, self-degrading, sad man. God is very hard to hear above the noise of biblical scripture and self-loathing. It is a sure way to mental and emotional illness... But hey this is only my opinion....

And finally, a loving marriage between two people of the same sex is no more "about sex" than a loving marriage between a man and woman. This whole "gay" equals "just sex" equation is a horribly disrespectful notion.

 

[outlaw]

Writing a book does not make one God.

You make keep the unrecognized gay adovcate, I'll stick to scripture that has been tested and shown true as is.

Pretending a word means something it does not does not change the meaning of the word.


Stick with what you like, I will stick with honesty and integrity

 

[Scally Cap]

Writing a book does not make one God.

I'll remember that the next time someone cites a commentary or other reference discussing hotly contested translated words. That's about the level of response I expected. It was a good effort, outlaw.

BTW, Happy Birthday there, CC. It's my step-daughter's birthday today too.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

Pretending a word means something it does not does not change the meaning of the word.


Stick with what you like, I will stick with honesty and integrity

MAJOR flaw in those empty claims - EVIDENCE.
Centuries upon century of evidence against the "newly discovered" Gnosticism that is being attempted and somehow, everybody is suppose to turn a blind eye to it. Century upon century of a void backing up the Gnostic claim only coupled with itching ears wanting it to be true.

And yet, they still keep printing the Bibles:

1 Corinthians 6:9-10
9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
~~~

This too is something the gay advocates can't even get past on the BASIC tenets; that EVEN IF a freedom to do something were legitimate, love for the brother in a divisive issue dictates abstaining from such freedom. The advocacy for sexual immorality, while understandable for being driven by the flesh, continues to lose, over and over again.

1 Corinthians 8:13
Therefore, if what I eat causes my brother to fall into sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause him to fall.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

BTW, Happy Birthday there, CC. It's my step-daughter's birthday today too.

Thanks, happy birthday to your step-daughter too.

 

[Kgreg]

Since you quoted me, I will assume all of this is directed my way.

It is not outside God's Will. There is only one God, and homosexual sex is outside of His will. Outside Christian law maybe..No "maybe" about it... If God has only provided for marriage between man and woman, than homosexuality would not exsits Not true. Humanity is fallen from the state of perfection that God created. Perversion of that perfection exists, and homosexuality is one of those perversions. Don't get me wrong here. I'm not standing here screaming "Pervert" at you. Perversion is just a deviation from what something should have been. The perfect will of God is for a man and a woman to unite as one in marriage, and to have sex only in that union, and to have children from that sex, if it is His will that they have children. The existence of a perversion doesn't nulify God's instructions for the behavior of His creation. Homosexual sex is not permitted behavior-my marriage would not exist. You certainly have the right to call your relationship whatever you want. Two men, nor two women will ever eqate the union of a man and a woman. And, it does.As I said, call your relatioship whatever you want.. I don't think God plays games--He doesn't. This life is a serious preparation for the next one.certainly not with me.I agree. I am not his pawn on his chess board.I never said you or anyone else is. He loves you too much to "play" with you. I am his friend This is un-Biblical, but then you aren't a Christian. I will caution you about putting yourself on equal footing with God. He's God. You are a man. and part of the whole that is Divinity. If you were a Christian, then in a certain sense this would be true. The love that I have to give is pure. And sharing that love with someone whom I TRUELY love is a pure way to rejoice in Divinity. It is real and it is good. The issue here is not love. I don't doubt that you love your homosexual partner. I don't doubt that he loves you. The issue is homosexual sex. It is a sin.

Some closet I'm not in the closet in any way, shape or form. gay guy I am a born-again Christian man who struggles against same-sex attraction. This is how I describe myself. Call me whatever you want. with his head stuck in a Bible, Everyday, as much as I can. praying over himself, I pray for a lot more than myself, beleive you me. hoping for a change, The only thing I truly hope for is to stand in front of God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit and hearing God say "Well done. I knew I could count on you. I know you have a lot of questions, but that can wait. Come on in and get some rest." forcing himself to marry a woman I would never force myself to do any such thing., is what I call a sin As much as you think you are on equal footing with God, you don't make the determination as to what is sin. You never had that power, and you never will. It is a sin of a self-obsorbed, self-degrading, sad man. If you actually knew me you would use none of those words to describe me. God is very hard to hear No. Not really for those who want to hear Him. above the noise of biblical scripture The Word of God is not noise to the ear of the believer.and self-loathing. I don't know where you got that, but I spend every minute of everyday thinking I'm the luckiest guy on the face of this earth! It is a sure way to mental and emotional illness..I'm quite mentally and emotional healthy. I assure you. But hey this is only my opinion...You most certainly have a right to one.

And finally, a loving marriage between two people of the same sex is no more "about sex" than a loving marriage between a man and woman. Of course a marraige cannot be based on sex alone. Althought, it is a very important part of the bond between a husband and wife. This whole "gay" equals "just sex" equation is a horribly disrespectful notion. I never at any time said that "gay equals sex". [/QUOTE]

There is one God. He has revealed Himself through the OT and NT. He created us, and no one knows better than He what is best for us. All of the good intentions of living in "pure" love will never change Him or the reality of His relationship with His creation based on the scrifice of Jesus for our sins, so that we don't have to pay the price for those sins. Everyone has sinned. Everyone. Sin requires judgement, a judgement in which everyone will be found guilty, except those who believe that Jesus paid that price for us already. It's a free gift. No one earns it or deserves it. Not me, or you, or Billy Graham or the Pope. It is the free gift of God for anyone who will accept it. The requirement is that after we accept it we leave what lies behind and strive forward to live within His instructions for His creation. Are we perfect? No, but we strive for it. Sometimes we fall. We get up. We ask for forgiveness, which is already given to us before we ask, and we continue on our walk with the Lord. It's hard sometimes. It's joyous most of the time. It's mysterious a lot of the time. It's always rewarding. I encourage you to give it some thought.

 

[sethad]

MAJOR flaw in those empty claims - EVIDENCE.
Centuries upon century of evidence against the "newly discovered" Gnosticism that is being attempted and somehow, everybody is suppose to turn a blind eye to it. Century upon century of a void backing up the Gnostic claim only coupled with itching ears wanting it to be true.

And yet, they still keep printing the Bibles:

1 Corinthians 6:9-10
9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
~~~

This too is something the gay advocates can't even get past on the BASIC tenets; that EVEN IF a freedom to do something were legitimate, love for the brother in a divisive issue dictates abstaining from such freedom. The advocacy for sexual immorality, while understandable for being driven by the flesh, continues to lose, over and over again.

1 Corinthians 8:13
Therefore, if what I eat causes my brother to fall into sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause him to fall.

note that it says homosexual offenders in that first verse. not homosexuals. so it could mean homosexual offenders as in those guys who used to keep little boys as sex slaves.

as I already said...

if it said heterosexual offenders would everyone think being heterosexual was a sin?

 

[ChristianCenturion]

note that it says homosexual offenders in that first verse. not homosexuals. so it could mean homosexual offenders as in those guys who used to keep little boys as sex slaves.

You can speculate all that you wish; however, that is hardly meeting the evidence requirement for this topic and it certainly wouldn't be a qualification to attempt teaching Christian tenets.

Yes, it says offenders. I have not argued that the person who is struggling with temptations of homosexuality is guilty of a sin. While the temptation is wrong and they should rightly flee from it, the fact that they persevere against it is a testimony to God's grace and power. The sin is not given the birth.

as I already said...

if it said heterosexual offenders would everyone think being heterosexual was a sin?

More speculations... you may wish to address ALL the supporting OTHER SCRIPTURE that would prove conflicted with such a change.

 

[sethad]

As it is...the verse in Leviticus is out if you think eating shrimp is ok.

the other verses are written by Paul, not Jesus. Jesus never mentioned homosexuality. and there already is speculation about the word that Paul used and that it may have meant sex offenders and pedophiles NOT homosexuals because the word for homosexuals back then was paiderasste, not arsenokoitai. over time people translated the word arsenokoitai to mean homosexual, but that doesnt mean it is what that passage originally meant.

It's kind of like people saying that Allah is the word for God. when in fact, that is what it has become to mean, the real word for god (any generic god) in Arabic is Ilah with the plural being Alihah.

and its kind of like how gay used to mean happy and now it means homosexual.

see how words change?

Have to look back to the time period when it was written to find the actual meaning.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

As it is...the verse in Leviticus is out if you think eating shrimp is ok.

Who says that the verse in Leviticus is out? You?
The Jew is still not to eat shrimp.

the other verses are written by Paul, not Jesus. Jesus never mentioned homosexuality.

Saint Paul is infinitely more qualified to say things regarding spiritual matters than any of the gay advocates. And the Christian teaching contains much more than a book with only red letters. Pointing to something else and saying "look over there" isn't helping the argument for homosexuality. Please try to recognize what topic is being discussed.

and there already is speculation about the word that Paul used and that it may have meant sex offenders and pedophiles NOT homosexuals because the word for homosexuals back then was paiderasste, not arsenokoitai. over time people translated the word arsenokoitai to mean homosexual, but that doesnt mean it is what that passage originally meant.

It's kind of like people saying that Allah is the word for God. when in fact, that is what it has become to mean, the real word for god (any generic god) in Arabic is Ilah with the plural being Alihah.

and its kind of like how gay used to mean happy and now it means homosexual.

see how words change?

Have to look back to the time period when it was written to find the actual meaning.

The word homosexual wasn't used until the 1800's, so your reasoning is flawed along with the fact that the premise of "only one word" exists, for a specific meaning, at any one time is ignorant. How many words do you think I can list (but won't) that mean homosexual.

Besides all the "what ifs", speculation, "it's all about the words", etc., it's a good thing God had wisdom enough to address the act in an easily understandable fashion then, huh?

Lev 18:22 " 'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.

 

[sethad]

so I'm guessing you also follow the other 600 laws ChristianCenturion?

Leviticus says not to lie with men

it also says not to eat shrimp among other things. Total of old covenant laws is over 600. do you follow all of them? you cant pick and choose you know

 

[sethad]

the word would mean describing a homosexual act. you'd have to go back and find the word that was used during Paul's time. not what is used now or what it has begun to mean now. that was my point, obviously you didnt get it.

and since the word homosexual wasnt invented until the 1800s I guess we could all say that it would be impossible to have homosexuality be a sin then (using your logic)

 

[ChristianCenturion]

so I'm guessing you also follow the other 600 laws ChristianCenturion?

Leviticus says not to lie with men

it also says not to eat shrimp among other things. Total of old covenant laws is over 600. do you follow all of them? you cant pick and choose you know

Non sequitur has been addressed here. The fact that one can thoroughly answer a question only to have the same question asked and by the same people only goes to show what kind of mindset is advocating for homosexuality and what meaningless tactics they use.

In addition, what is ignorant in that argument is highlighted by the latter part of Leviticus 18. God shows that the sexual immorality law not only was to apply to the Jew, but the Gentile as in those among them and as shown by God Judging those that practiced it elsewhere - later to become the Promised Land.

 

[levi501]

it also says not to eat shrimp among other things. Total of old covenant laws is over 600. do you follow all of them? you cant pick and choose you know

Uh yah he can...
Philippians 4:13
"I can do everything through him who gives me strength."

That includes picking and choosing which laws to obey.