- Mar 27, 2007
- 35,449
- 4,301
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
The pun and playing of words does not change God's creation of one man and one woman. God's intention in creating just a man and a woman becomes evident in Genesis 1:28 where God describes the purpose of His creation. Isolating verses is dangerous since it negates the intended meaning only possible by reading the verse in context. How would God's purpose of creating a man and a woman so that they could procreate and populate the earth factor into God condoning homosexual sex and marriages? The answer is that it doesn't. It is inescapable that God did not create homosexual sex or homosexual relationships. This makes it proscriptive instead of merely descriptive. BTW-That does not in any way take away from heterosexual marriages that are barren and is a different topic.
The word "adam", as used in Genesis 1:27, could certainly translate as "mankind" but that is not the only possible translation since the most common translation is "man" not "mankind" and to make matters worse for your theory "adam" is a masculine noun and not generic in gender. To get the proper perspective on the intended meaning of "Adam" one has to take into consideration the beginning verses of Genesis 5.
The verses above clarifies God's creation and the interchangeability of the meaning of "Adam" but in the proper context. God created "Adam" (man) in his likeness. God created only male and female and called them "mankind" ("adam"). Genesis 1:27 along with Genesis 5:1:2 clarifies that the only possible marriage combination is between a man and a woman. It also clarifies that sexual intercourse between someone other than a man and a woman (in marriage) is not God's creation purpose and threfore is not of God.
With regards to Matthew 19, the context is indeed divorce but you are ignoring the "composition" of the marriage described in verse 5. Again, isolating verses is dangerous. Matthew 19:4-6:
4 And He answered and said to them, Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh? 6 So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.
Verse 5 is specific as to what constitues a marriage since the beginning (male and female from verse 4). A man ("anthropos" translated as the masculine gender "man") is joined to his wife ("gune" which only translates as the feminine gender of either wife or woman) and become one flesh. This is specific and excludes homosexual marriage and consequently homosexual sex. A man and a man or a woman and a woman is not what God created at the beginning to become one flesh and therefore is not of God.
With regards to Leveticus 18:22 and 20:13, there is very little chance that you can support your theory. The verses clearly specify what God considers a man 'laying" with a man. This verses are not about adultery and nothing in the verses even suggests that the context is about adultery. In Leveticus 18:22 God makes homosexuality against Gods law and in Leveticus 20:13 God explains what the penalty for braking His law is. God is clear about what He thinks of homsexual sex.
Upvote
0