No, the reason there are so many threads about homosexuality is because Christians are obsessed with shoving the subject down our throats.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
You know why there are so many gay threads here? 'Cause people like you don't stay on topic but would rather flame other people.
Why do you seek to remove the mote from thy brother's eye without first removing the beam from thy own eye? Remove first the beam, so that you may be able to see better to remove the mote from thy brother's eye.
Or, alternatively:
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone
Or, alternatively:
Judge not, lest ye be judged
OObi said:Jude 7 makes the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah even more explicit: the inhabitants indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, and what could be stranger than men fornicating with other men?
OObi said:Jude 7 makes the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah even more explicit: the inhabitants “indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh,” and what could be stranger than men fornicating with other men?
Ummm...how about bestiality? Now THERE'S a subject I don't see being pounded into the ground.
But on the subject of "strange flesh" - did you ever stop to wonder that maybe it was referring to the angels?
If you give satan the credit for something which belongs to God only, then you break the first commandment. You make satan into God, and you worship him by your words.
It is God who creates, not satan. It is God who makes people, not satan. It is God who determines who and what we are, from our mother's womb, not satan. It is also God who chooses to bestow the gift of homosexuality on both men and women, and the rest of us should thank him for that gift, imo. The world would be a far poorer place without gay people, and the gifts they bring to the world along with their sexual orientation, whether or not they express that orientation in a g****** way or not.
Anyone looking at the contribution of gay people to our society will see tremendous life, tremendous creativity, and tremendous love. These things can only come from God.
You are not called to tell other people of their sins. You are called only to concern yourself with your own sins.
Erm, I'd like to point out here, that homosexuality =/= sex.
The context of that statement concerns a condemning attitude about. Condemning people, rather then the sin, something I am not doing.
I agree, that is pretty ridiculous. However, the satan given sexual orientation of homosexuals....
Not Ezekial, but rather you...
Ezekiel 16:49-50
"Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had arrogance, abundant food, and careless ease, but she did not help the poor and needy. Thus they were haughty and committed abominations before Me. Therefore I removed them when I saw it.
Do we have two conflicting accounts of Sodoms guilt in Scripture? Does Genesis focus on homosexuality, while the prophet Ezekiel accuses the citys inhabitants of pride and inhospitality?
The two passages are actually in agreement, for Ezekiel does not ignore the issue of homosexuality at all. The prophets reference to the fact that Sodom committed abominations before God is no doubt a reference to the inhabitants homosexual proclivities especially with the Genesis story in the minds of Ezekiels hearers. After all, the Jews understood abomination as a common way of referring to grotesque sexual sin like homosexuality (Lev. 18:22).
Therefore, rather than being an unexpected revision of Scriptural history, Ezekiels reference to Sodom is a clear explanation of it, adding to the Genesis account, rather than contradicting it. The arrogant self-indulgence of Sodoms citizens contributed to the sexual perversion.
In fact, this supposition fits more reasonably within the context of Ezekiels denunciation of Israel who, after all, is the real subject of the prophets preaching. Israels harlotries and abominations, clearly laid out in the earlier portions of Ezekiel 16, are tied to the unfaithful nations own wealth and material blessings (vv. 10-14). Such luxury and arrogance, therefore, can lead to sexual perversion, and that would be the precise impact of Ezekiels reference to Sodom.
However, the attempt to deflect away from homosexuality the horror of the judgment upon Sodom and Gomorrah receives its fatal blow from the New Testament. The epistles of both 2 Peter and Jude link Sodoms guilt to carnality and sexual perversion.
In 2 Peter 2, the apostle said the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah should serve as an example to the wicked of every generation (vs. 6). Lott, he said, continually witnessed the sensual conduct of unprincipled men, who, among other things, indulge the flesh in its corrupt desires (vv. 7, 10).
Jude 7 makes the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah even more explicit: the inhabitants indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, and what could be stranger than men fornicating with other men?
While the two cursed cities may have been judged for more than their homosexuality, there is no legitimate way to remove homosexuality from the list of sins that doomed them.
Ummm...how about bestiality? Now THERE'S a subject I don't see being pounded into the ground.
But on the subject of "strange flesh" - did you ever stop to wonder that maybe it was referring to the angels? Did you wonder why the book of Jude doesn't just tell it like it is, if indeed it is referring to homosexuality? I mean, you yourself stated "the Greek word in the New Testament for homosexuality is literally "a sodomite"." Why didn't Jude simply use that terminology?
Not to mention, I presume you are aware that God had already decided to destroy the cities BEFORE He even sent the angels to warn Lot. So at the very least, His decision was not based on the incident at Lot's house.
Because of several hundred years of anti-gay propaganda.I'm writing this thread not so I can go out and condemn people for their sins. Rather, it seems that there is a lot of defense in the Christian community for this sin, and that shouldn't be. Do I write this in hopes that it will diminish efforts to try and defend what is clearly, Biblically, wrong.
Anyone who has heard of the cities of "Sodom and Gommorah" knows that they were notorious hotbeds of homosexuality.
Does not support your point.Gen 19:5-8
"and they called to Lot and said to him, 'Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have relations with them.' But Lot went out to them at the doorway, and shut the door behind him, and said, 'Please, my brothers, do not act wickedly.'"
Untrue. "Do not bear false witness".The Greek word in the New Testament for homosexuality is literally "a sodomite".
(A term that has unchanged in 5000 years, even today- "sodomy") Apart from the fact the city was clearly destroyed by God because of homosexuality in the narrative of Gen 19, even the New Testament clearly states exactly the same thing in Jude 7.
Jude 7
"Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example, in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire."
Taken out of context with dubious translation.Here are more Bible quotes,
Genesis doesn't even mention homosexuality. It describes RAPE (ie just about the most extreme act of inhospitablity possible).The context of that statement concerns a condemning attitude about. Condemning people, rather then the sin, something I am not doing.
I agree, that is pretty ridiculous. However, the satan given sexual orientation of homosexuals....
Not Ezekial, but rather you...
Ezekiel 16:49-50
"Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had arrogance, abundant food, and careless ease, but she did not help the poor and needy. Thus they were haughty and committed abominations before Me. Therefore I removed them when I saw it.
Do we have two conflicting accounts of Sodoms guilt in Scripture? Does Genesis focus on homosexuality, while the prophet Ezekiel accuses the citys inhabitants of pride and inhospitality?
The word translated abomination in Lev 18:22 is one reserved for ritual sins, not sexual sins.The two passages are actually in agreement, for Ezekiel does not ignore the issue of homosexuality at all. The prophets reference to the fact that Sodom committed abominations before God is no doubt a reference to the inhabitants homosexual proclivities especially with the Genesis story in the minds of Ezekiels hearers. After all, the Jews understood abomination as a common way of referring to grotesque sexual sin like homosexuality (Lev. 18:22).
Rest of the attempt to justify ignoring the condemnations made by the prophets of which we are all guilty, in favour of manipulating it to justify persecuting a few.Therefore, rather than being an unexpected revision of Scriptural history, Ezekiels reference to Sodom is a clear explanation of it, adding to the Genesis account, rather than contradicting it. The arrogant self-indulgence of Sodoms citizens contributed to the sexual perversion.
In fact, this supposition fits more reasonably within the context of Ezekiels denunciation of Israel who, after all, is the real subject of the prophets preaching. Israels harlotries and abominations, clearly laid out in the earlier portions of Ezekiel 16, are tied to the unfaithful nations own wealth and material blessings (vv. 10-14). Such luxury and arrogance, therefore, can lead to sexual perversion, and that would be the precise impact of Ezekiels reference to Sodom.
However, the attempt to deflect away from homosexuality the horror of the judgment upon Sodom and Gomorrah receives its fatal blow from the New Testament. The epistles of both 2 Peter and Jude link Sodoms guilt to carnality and sexual perversion.
Indeed it should - to a western world that does all the things Ezekiel condemns them for.In 2 Peter 2, the apostle said the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah should serve as an example to the wicked of every generation (vs. 6).
Circular argument.Jude 7 makes the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah even more explicit: the inhabitants indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, and what could be stranger than men fornicating with other men?
Not a single biblical source includes homosexuality in the list - it is you who are adding to the bible.While the two cursed cities may have been judged for more than their homosexuality, there is no legitimate way to remove homosexuality from the list of sins that doomed them.
Then you have missed the point. Matthew 23 has strong words to say to those who "teach the commandments" in the way you do.Matthew 5:19 says that whoever teaches the commandments will be called great in Heaven. I consider this teaching the commandments.
It mentions homosexual rape.Genesis doesn't even mention homosexuality. It describes RAPE (ie just about the most extreme act of inhospitablity possible).
You base that on what? Liberal hermanutics? I'm sure there was heterosexual ritual sins as well, why aren't they mentioned? (that's besides the uncleaness rituals) Why didn't he just say ritual sex? Why would he point out homosexuals in particular?The word translated abomination in Lev 18:22 is one reserved for ritual sins, not sexual sins.
Rest of the attempt to justify ignoring the condemnations made by the prophets of which we are all guilty, in favour of manipulating it to justify persecuting a few.
Indeed, especially the justifcation of sin.Indeed it should - to a western world that does all the things Ezekiel condemns them for.
Reinforces the sin in Genesis.Circular argument.
Romans 1:26...answer my question in the other thread please.Not a single biblical source includes homosexuality in the list - it is you who are adding to the bible.
Actually it's more like 1 Corinthians 5:9-12.Then you have missed the point. Matthew 23 has strong words to say to those who "teach the commandments" in the way you do.
Glad I haven't done such a thing then...
God did not create sin. Satan uses sin to tempt people. When God created heterosexuals, He unfortunately also created homosexualty. Not what He wants. But because this is true, using it as a defense for your position is like saying since God created hands, killing someone with your hands is not a sin but rather "beautiful" as you seem to be saying...
Stop fooling yourself.
I really hope that isn't the case because that wouldn't leave much room for witnessing:
Matthew 5:19 says that whoever teaches the commandments will be called great in Heaven. I consider this teaching the commandments.
When you provide scripture that God made gays then you have an argument other that your whole argument falls apart. Not to mention we are to love everyone (gays include) just not their sin (homosexuality).You do it all the time. In this answer too.
That is a non sequitur, and has no bearing on this case. God created men and women, and created some of them with same sex orientation. Some choose to express that in same sex relations, some choose to sublimate it into art, religion etc. You, however, lump all such people together and condemn them all. You outGod God every time. Good luck with that.
Projection.
It matters not a jot what you consider your words to be. All that matters is what God has to say, and one of the first things he says is that he does not like anyone taking his place.
You cannot take one 'sin' out of Scripture, and manufacture your own religion, with yourself as the god of it, determining what is and what is not sin, and then expect other people to go along with that. Such an approach distorts the heart of the gospel, which is love and reconciliation.
I cannot imagine for one moment Christ taking the position which you are taking. Christ did not ever, one single time, open his mouth without first feeling the deepest compassion for the person he was addressing.
In my opinion, you have no right to 'teach the commandments' to anyone whom you do not first love. If you do not love gay people, then you have no right whatever to speak to them of God, for the simple reason that you are not qualified to do so, and must therefore refrain. Otherwise you become what Paul condemned most of all; the Christian without love, who is as a clashing gong and a sounding cymbal.
This is a very circular argument. "God created all people with same sex orientation, therefore you are being hateful towards people with same-sex orientation."You do it all the time. In this answer too.
That is a non sequitur, and has no bearing on this case. God created men and women, and created some of them with same sex orientation. Some choose to express that in same sex relations, some choose to sublimate it into art, religion etc. You, however, lump all such people together and condemn them all. You outGod God every time. Good luck with that.
Projection.
It matters not a jot what you consider your words to be. All that matters is what God has to say, and one of the first things he says is that he does not like anyone taking his place.
You cannot take one 'sin' out of Scripture, and manufacture your own religion, with yourself as the god of it, determining what is and what is not sin, and then expect other people to go along with that. Such an approach distorts the heart of the gospel, which is love and reconciliation.
I cannot imagine for one moment Christ taking the position which you are taking. Christ did not ever, one single time, open his mouth without first feeling the deepest compassion for the person he was addressing.
In my opinion, you have no right to 'teach the commandments' to anyone whom you do not first love. If you do not love gay people, then you have no right whatever to speak to them of God, for the simple reason that you are not qualified to do so, and must therefore refrain. Otherwise you become what Paul condemned most of all; the Christian without love, who is as a clashing gong and a sounding cymbal.
Sounds more like a strawman argument to me.This is a very circular argument. "God created all people with same sex orientation, therefore you are being hateful towards people with same-sex orientation."
The reason it's circular is that you've not provided any evidence to support your thesis, because none exists, and you've misrepresented the position of a person you know nothing about in order to justify the argument itself. Do you know whether any given person on this thread hates homosexuals? Do you know whether or not this is just a case of doctrinal defense with no personal implications? This argument seems to be of the same spirit as the rest of the arguments on this thread, so I presume this is showing just as much love as they are?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?