Homosexuality

[Mling]

Yeah, if you refer to it as a choice you can ignore all those complicated moral questions. Much more comfortable that way.

 

[Colabomb]

Yeah, if you refer to it as a choice you can ignore all those complicated moral questions. Much more comfortable that way.

Respectfully, the same could be said about a liberal interpretation of the Scriptures.

BTW, it may not be a choice to be attracted to the same sex, but it is a choice to sleep with the same sex.

Temptation is not sin, acting on that temptation is.

 

[united4Peace]

... forsaking the natural function for the unnatural, which is precisely what the Bible calls it?

I seriously doubt Owencrab's children will have a question about their sexuality, since their parent(s) wouldn't be afraid to call sin, sin.

Im not afraid to call a sin a sin either,
However Im not afraid to love and accept my child or anyone for that matter for who they are....
Sexuality is not a sin...it is a gift.

 

[IisJustMe]

Im not afraid to call a sin a sin either,
However Im not afraid to love and accept my child or anyone for that matter for who they are....
Sexuality is not a sin...it is a gift.

It is sinful behavior, just as is adultery or other sexual sin. You contradict yourself, in saying that "sexuality is a gift" right after you say you aren't afraid to call sin, sin, because in so doing, you have refused to call homosexual behavior a sin.

 

[lilymarie]

Yeah, if you refer to it as a choice you can ignore all those complicated moral questions. Much more comfortable that way.

Every type of sexual behavior is a "choice", unless it is rape.

 

[united4Peace]

It is sinful behavior, just as is adultery or other sexual sin. You contradict yourself, in saying that "sexuality is a gift" right after you say you aren't afraid to call sin, sin, because in so doing, you have refused to call homosexual behavior a sin.

No one told me I had to call homosexuality a sin.
Please dont tell me what I have to do.
I did not contradict myself as I do not have to look at homosexuality as a sin and a homosexual or bisexual do not have to look at themselves as sinful either.
God made everyone unique....
God does not make mistakes...

 

[lilymarie]

No one told me I had to call homosexuality a sin.
Please dont tell me what I have to do.
I did not contradict myself as I do not have to look at homosexuality as a sin and a homosexual or bisexual do not have to look at themselves as sinful either.
God made everyone unique....
God does not make mistakes...

No one told you homosexuality was a sin?

Well how about Jesus?

He's listening you know.

What would you say to him right now?

 

[Colabomb]

No one told me I had to call homosexuality a sin.
Please dont tell me what I have to do.
I did not contradict myself as I do not have to look at homosexuality as a sin and a homosexual or bisexual do not have to look at themselves as sinful either.
God made everyone unique....
God does not make mistakes...

God did not make the mistake. Man did.

 

[ThyNeighbor]

No one told you homosexuality was a sin?

Well how about Jesus?

Scriptural reference please....

He's listening you know.

What would you say to him right now?

I'd say, "Thank You for Your grace and Your forgiveness. Thank You for Your mercy for not one man or woman was able to keep Your laws and ALL have fallen short of Your glory. Thank you for Your unfathonable love for all of us whose own righteousness are like dirty rags. Thank you for making a way for a sinner like me to spend all of eternity with You."

 

[Colabomb]

Scriptural reference please....




I'd say, "Thank You for Your grace and Your forgiveness. Thank You for Your mercy for not one man or woman was able to keep Your laws and ALL have fallen short of Your glory. Thank you for Your unfathonable love for all of us whose own righteousness are like dirty rags. Thank you for making a way for a sinner like me to spend all of eternity with You."

She is incorrect that Christ is quoted as mentioning Homosexuality.

However, Paul has said some things about it.

 

[lilymarie]

Scriptural reference please....




I'd say, "Thank You for Your grace and Your forgiveness. Thank You for Your mercy for not one man or woman was able to keep Your laws and ALL have fallen short of Your glory. Thank you for Your unfathonable love for all of us whose own righteousness are like dirty rags. Thank you for making a way for a sinner like me to spend all of eternity with You."

The question was not yours to answer.

However, I see you read the NIV. So which scriptural reference do you have to say that Jesus said otherwise since you answered the question out of turn, I think that's only fair.

You post a scripture reference where Jesus says homosexuality is not a sin.

 

[lilymarie]

She is incorrect that Christ is quoted as mentioning Homosexuality.

However, Paul has said some things about it.

No, Jesus spoke about it as well. However, I will let my other post I posted stand so that the person can prove otherwise, as he answered a post not directed at himself or herself. (Sorry, I didn't check the icon or the name of the poster; however, I already posted my reply.)

Okay, I'll meet you halfway. Show me a scripture where Jesus said otherwise, and I'll show you one where he said homosexuality is a sin. Being a repentant homosexual is not a sin, just like being a repentant heterosexual is not a sin, or a repentant bisexual or trisexual, or whatever. So let me make that clear first of all.

 

[ThyNeighbor]

The question was not yours to answer.

Sorry for the faux pas. I was under the impression that public forums were open to public debate/opinion. I stand corrected.

However, I see you read the NIV. So which scriptural reference do you have to say that Jesus said otherwise since you answered the question out of turn, I think that's only fair.

You post a scripture reference where Jesus says homosexuality is not a sin.

I don't restrict myself to one version of the Bible, though the NIV is my primary. When I want to research something I use many.

On the whole, I see Jesus as being silent on the issue. However, I have read some interesting arguements that he actually did speak on it:

The New Testament was written in Greek. At the time, Hebrew, Greek, and the translation between them used the term eunuch two ways: literally, meaning the castrated; and symbolically, meaning those who do not marry and/or bear children.
Jesus was the first to recognize sexual outcasts as worthy of God's kingdom. He and his disciples were discussing marriage and divorce in Matthew 19:12 when he said: "All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given. For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it."
This quote from Matthew is the closest biblical reference we have to our current understanding that homosexuality is a psychological identity, rather than just physical acts. For Christ to have known this in biblical times is a testament to his inspired understanding.
Jesus brought a new covenant with God, not only to the children of Israel but to all mankind. It is a covenant of loving your neighbor as yourself, and raising a joyful noise unto the Lord. The communities established by his disciples, who knew and quoted him, accepted all the outcasts of Israel and understood the Genesis account of sex as the gift of companionship as well as procreation.
This fulfills the prophecy of the Messiah. In Isaiah 56: 2-8, the eunuch is predicted to inherit a special place in the house of the Lord and the sons of strangers are predicted to take hold of the Lord's covenant. Verse 7 predicts: "Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people."

 

[lilymarie]

[/color]

Sorry for the faux pas. I was under the impression that public forums were open to public debate/opinion. I stand corrected.



I don't restrict myself to one version of the Bible, though the NIV is my primary. When I want to research something I use many.

On the whole, I see Jesus as being silent on the issue. However, I have read some interesting arguements that he actually did speak on it:

The New Testament was written in Greek. At the time, Hebrew, Greek, and the translation between them used the term eunuch two ways: literally, meaning the castrated; and symbolically, meaning those who do not marry and/or bear children.
Jesus was the first to recognize sexual outcasts as worthy of God's kingdom. He and his disciples were discussing marriage and divorce in Matthew 19:12 when he said: "All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given. For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it."
This quote from Matthew is the closest biblical reference we have to our current understanding that homosexuality is a psychological identity, rather than just physical acts. For Christ to have known this in biblical times is a testament to his inspired understanding.
Jesus brought a new covenant with God, not only to the children of Israel but to all mankind. It is a covenant of loving your neighbor as yourself, and raising a joyful noise unto the Lord. The communities established by his disciples, who knew and quoted him, accepted all the outcasts of Israel and understood the Genesis account of sex as the gift of companionship as well as procreation.
This fulfills the prophecy of the Messiah. In Isaiah 56: 2-8, the eunuch is predicted to inherit a special place in the house of the Lord and the sons of strangers are predicted to take hold of the Lord's covenant. Verse 7 predicts: "Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people."

That's fine. I understand that in THAT all people who are NON practicing homosexuals will inherit the Kingdom of God. But, practicing homosexuals will not if they do not ask for forgiveness AND repent. So, why have the label? If I chose not to marry as a heterosexual, do I have to call myself a non-practising Christian heterosexual?

____________________________

I looked up King James to add to the discussion. Please look up the words if one doesn't understand the meaning. I can post the NIV version of Mark 7 as well. Who is speaking here?

7:15 There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him: but the things which come out of him, those are they that defile the man.

7:16 If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.

7:17 And when he was entered into the house from the people, his disciples asked him concerning the parable.

7:18 And he saith unto them, Are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him;

7:19 Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?

7:20 And he said, That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man.

7:21 For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders,

7:22 Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness:

7:23 All these evil things come from within, and defile the man.

 

[ThyNeighbor]

I looked up King James to add to the discussion. Please look up the words if one doesn't understand the meaning. I can post the NIV version of Mark 7 as well. Who is speaking here?

7:15 There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him: but the things which come out of him, those are they that defile the man.

7:16 If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.

7:17 And when he was entered into the house from the people, his disciples asked him concerning the parable.

7:18 And he saith unto them, Are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him;

7:19 Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?

7:20 And he said, That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man.

7:21 For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders,

7:22 Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness:

7:23 All these evil things come from within, and defile the man.

Sorry, I don't see the reference Jesus is making to homosexuality in that.

 

[IisJustMe]

No one told me I had to call homosexuality a sin. Please dont tell me what I have to do.

God told you to look at it as sin, in the Mosaic Law ...

You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination. (Leviticus 18:22)

And please forgive me, you are completely incorrect, and you did it again ...

I did not contradict myself as I do not have to look at homosexuality as a sin and a homosexual or bisexual do not have to look at themselves as sinful either.
God made everyone unique....
God does not make mistakes...

If you are a Christian, you are declaring yourself in agreement with God about His declarations through His word, so in light of the verse above, you are absolutely in contradiction with your description of yourself as a Christian. Jesus said: "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished." That pretty much negates your being able to claim the Law doesn't apply to us. We are not subject to its condemnation, as we are under the blood of Christ, but nonetheless it is valid as a measuring rod, or as our "tutor" as Paul termed it.

Further you contradicted youself when you said you don't have to view homosexual behavior as sin, because clearly you are correct in stating God doesn't make mistakes, therefore you have negated the argument that "they can't help themselves," because -- again, as you've said -- He doesn't make mistakes. Therefore their behavior, in light of Leviticus 18:22, is indeed sin. The good news is, God loves the sinner, and has made provision for those who would believe in Him for salvation. God doesn't condemn those who practice homosexuality any more than He condemns murderers or rapists, so long as they let those sins fall under His shed blood.

You have contradicted yourself, repeatedly. But the good news is, everyone does, and it doesn't make any difference to the Father who loves you, as long as you renew the fellowship through confession and repentance.

 

[ThyNeighbor]

I'm very sorry to hear that.

Perhaps you could try a dictionary?

I've been this silly route before, and it's pretty ridiculous. Do you know what adultery is as compared to fornication? Do you know what lasciviousness is? Perhaps you could look them up in your dictionary? There are also dictionaries online for free.

Do you know what lewdness is, as described in the NIV version?

However, you are accountable to The Lord, not me. If you wish to twist scripture; then take it up with Jesus.

Perhaps I didn't give the scripture that you provided the indepth analysis that it deserves. I only looked at one other translation and two commentaries. I'll be sure to break out my Strongs concordance and look up the words that you mentioned.

I am not familiar with what silly routines you have performed and I find nothing at all ridiculous about this subject, except perhaps yours and many others preoccupation with it.

I especially take umberage at your suggestion that I am twisting scripture when I have done nothing of the sort. I simply stated that I didn't see Jesus saying anything against homosexulity in that reference.

In one thing you are correct, I am not accountable to you or anyone else for my sexuality. How, when, and with whom I express it is between me and Jesus. You, madam, are not qualified to judge.

 

[united4Peace]

God told you to look at it as sin, in the Mosaic Law ...

You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination. (Leviticus 18:22)

And please forgive me, you are completely incorrect, and you did it again ...
If you are a Christian, you are declaring yourself in agreement with God about His declarations through His word, so in light of the verse above, you are absolutely in contradiction with your description of yourself as a Christian. Jesus said: "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished." That pretty much negates your being able to claim the Law doesn't apply to us. We are not subject to its condemnation, as we are under the blood of Christ, but nonetheless it is valid as a measuring rod, or as our "tutor" as Paul termed it.

Further you contradicted youself when you said you don't have to view homosexual behavior as sin, because clearly you are correct in stating God doesn't make mistakes, therefore you have negated the argument that "they can't help themselves," because -- again, as you've said -- He doesn't make mistakes. Therefore their behavior, in light of Leviticus 18:22, is indeed sin. The good news is, God loves the sinner, and has made provision for those who would believe in Him for salvation. God doesn't condemn those who practice homosexuality any more than He condemns murderers or rapists, so long as they let those sins fall under His shed blood.

You have contradicted yourself, repeatedly. But the good news is, everyone does, and it doesn't make any difference to the Father who loves you, as long as you renew the fellowship through confession and repentance.

I could have sworn a Christian was someone who believed and followed in Christ's way.
As for contradicting myself I disagree...
The laws of Leviticus were laws made at that time for those people...not for us in this day and age...

The Bible says menstrating women are unclean, we know that that is untrue...(not to share a bed with a menstuating women- hmmm this is still considered a sin??).
Im sure God does love murderers and rapists...
And yes HOmosexuals are sinners just as Heterosexuals are sinners...but not sinners because of their sexuality or sinners because they are in a loving relationship...and our sins whatever they maybe are totally separte than a murderer or rapists unless by chance one is (heterosexual men rape more than do homosexual men)...
Though again Im sure God still loves them also-murderers and rapists and other evil people whose sexuality have nothing to do with their sins or why they are evil...

I suppose though you are going to insist that I am incorrect, though in that case I suppose you would then insist many other Christians were incorrect so I need not worry as I do stand in good company.
GBY though...

 

[holo]

It is convenient to define sin as whatever contradicts your choice of commandments and your personal moral interpretation of the scriptures. It is convenient to completely separate God´s will from things like common sense - you don´t have to really justify any opinion, you can just say "the bible says so, that ends it".

The problem, of course, is that some of us believe in a God who is quite different. A God who is, more than anything, concerned with our well-being, and certainly much more so than us keeping all sorts of rules. That´s why I have no reason to assume God will judge or frown upon two grown people who love each other and have decided to live with each other.

 

[Daniels]

Good article, recieved 2 months back via e mail.

HOMOSEXUALITY
In spite of the disagreements pertaining to male/female relationships within Christianity, perhaps an even bigger concern these days is homosexuality. To what extent should the church accommodate homosexuals who want to get involved? Some churches welcome homosexual couples and even perform “holy union” ceremonies, since most states don’t allow legal gay marriages. Other churches organize protests against homosexuality with a fervor that makes the Salem witch trials seem like a tea party in contrast.
This issue is causing many in the church to reevaluate long-standing positions. Many denominations are convening to discuss the matter and determine how they wish to respond. Some are dividing based on diverse wishes of its member churches. Other scattered congregations are withdrawing from denominations in order to practice as they wish.
The traditional church stance has been that homosexuality is clearly sinful, and therefore not allowed in a church setting, of all places. The first verse we tend to hear from conservative spokespeople is Leviticus 18:22: “Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable” (NIV). The newer translations read, “Do not practice homosexuality; it is a detestable sin” (NLT). And the consequences of choosing such a lifestyle were spelled out just as clearly: “The penalty for homosexual acts is death to both parties. They have committed a detestable act and are guilty of a capital offense” (Leviticus 20:13).
In response, some people are quick to point out that Leviticus also contains a number of other “outdated” laws and rules. When was the last time we saw a child stoned to death for swearing at a parent (Leviticus 20:9)? When was the last time you had a priest over to check out the house after a bad case of mildew or to regulate the healing of a nasty skin lesion (Leviticus 13:18-23; 47-59)? Our dietary restrictions aren’t nearly so stringent as they used to be (Leviticus 11). And some say that the prohibition against homosexuality is just as “outdated” as those other Old Testament laws.
Not so, rebuts the conservative element. While a number of things changed as we went from Old Testament law to New Testament grace, the fact that homosexuality remains a no-no continues throughout the New Testament. Two emphatic passages are Romans 1:26-27 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10.
It seems clear enough, say some people, that until homosexuals are willing to “straighten up,” the church cannot in good conscience allow them to fully participate. As with most other issues, of course, the lines are drawn in different places. A number of conservative churches encourage attendance and participation of anyone and everyone, yet will be much more restrictive when it comes to church leadership. Homosexuals will eventually be expected to renounce their lifestyle or at least cease active practice. The same demands would be placed on adulterers, alcoholics, and others who continued to exhibit what the Bible defines as sinful activity.
Other churches place no such restrictions on practicing homosexuals, including them in leadership and even performing official ceremonies to unite them as couples. And yet these churches also feel they conform to biblical teachings.
Their argument is that homosexuality is not merely a personal choice but a predetermined natural design. Just as some people are born with heterosexual biological urges, so they say, others have homosexual passions instead. Even if some of us believe such feelings are genetically incorrect, they must be God-given. And if this large group of people has no choice in the matter, to deny them full participation in the church is wrong. Just as Jesus gave full respect to lepers, women, Samaritans, and other persecuted minorities of His day, so the church needs to reach out in acceptance of the increasingly active homosexual community.
The confusion is likely to continue for a while as both scientists and theologians debate the nature, and even the definition, of homosexuality. Opinions remain strongly divided. It’s easy for those within the church to perceive most homosexuals to be of the “flaming” variety, with promiscuous sexual habits and outrageous lifestyles. But it’s much harder to explain why a heterosexual philanderer who regularly harbors lust in his heart is more welcome in most churches than a loving, committed, monogamous gay couple.


PRIDE IS A PROBLEM—GAY OR STRAIGHT
And in spite of any official church policy, either involving homosexuality or not, it may be that some churches tend to discriminate against homosexuals without realizing it. If we look at the New Testament command against homosexuality in its context, we see a number of other sins listed that the church tends to tolerate much more readily: “Those who indulge in sexual sin, who are idol worshipers, adulterers, male prostitutes, homosexuals, thieves, greedy people, drunkards, abusers, and swindlers—none of these will have a share in the kingdom of God. There was a time when some of you were just like that, but now your sins have been washed away, and you have been set apart for God” (1 Corinthians 6:9-11).
Many churches sponsor AA meetings to help “drunkards.” They work with abusers and adulterers. And what Sunday morning church service is without its fair share of thieves, greedy people, and swindlers? Yet some churches may tend to place more emphasis on the wrongness of homosexuality above any of these other things.
Even the Old Testament refuses to isolate homosexuality as a sin more or less abominable than any other. The twin cities of gay pride in the Old Testament were Sodom and Gomorrah, and staunch conservatives frequently like to point to their fire-and-brimstone destruction (Genesis 19) to show what God thinks of homosexuality. But again, if we put the story into context and read the rest of the Bible, we may see the account in a different light.
Centuries later, after Israel and Judah had been taken into captivity because of idolatry and other major sins against God, the Lord sent a message to them through Ezekiel the prophet:

“As surely as I live, says the Sovereign Lord, Sodom and her daughters were never as wicked as you and your daughters. Sodom’s sins were pride, laziness, and gluttony, while the poor and needy suffered outside her door. She was proud and did loathsome things, so I wiped her out, as you have seen. . . . In your proud days you held Sodom in contempt. But now your greater wickedness has been exposed to all the world, and you are the one who is scorned” (Ezekiel 16:48-50, 56-57).

Indeed, homosexuality typified by rape, abuse, and perhaps even murder was rampant in Sodom and Gomorrah. And this is how we tend to remember those Old Testament cities. But it wasn’t just the homosexuality that was recalled by Ezekiel but the more basic problems of pride, sloth, and gluttony. And according to God, later generations of those who called themselves by His name were guilty of “greater wickedness.” The gay pride of Sodom and Gomorrah paled in comparison to the spiritual pride of God’s people during Ezekiel’s day. Can Christians today say we’re doing any better?
While believers may legitimately use Scripture to justify a stand against homosexuality, many need to seek a broader and deeper understanding of what the Bible has to say about sin in general. So do those who attempt to chide the church into justifying the blind acceptance of homosexuals regardless of their attitudes, practices, and spiritual condition.
Regardless of the tolerance levels of individuals or church boards, it would seem that at the very least, from a biblical perspective, homosexuality is included in the list of behaviors that should be abandoned by those who wish to pursue greater devotion to God in a church setting. Scripture doesn’t endorse anything-goes homosexual practice within church walls, nor does it justify the other extreme of homophobia.
It is yet to be seen what will happen on a large scale as homosexuality and Christianity continue to intersect. Some churches are certain to maintain the age-old invitation of “come as you are,” but don’t stay as you are. Others will probably become more accepting of homosexuals and will somehow justify it according to Scripture.
Not so many decades ago the church took a hard stance against divorced people in leadership roles. A few still do. Concerned Christians could point to clear biblical passages to remind us that God hates divorce (Malachi 2:16) and that any church leader should be the husband of one wife (1 Timothy 3:2). But as more and more pastors and church leaders got divorced and remarried, gradually the stigma of divorce faded away in many churches. While remaining a tragic statistic in the eyes of most, divorced people eventually found inclusion in the same churches that once excluded them. Will the same be true of homosexuality? We will have to wait and see.