Homosexuality

[davedjy]

Well. I came across some proofs that 1st century christians strictly forbid homosexuality. And those passages leave NO place for debate or interpretation. They are really really clear.

Check this topic about it (read the quote):
http://www.christianforums.com/t4864902-canon-new-testament-apocrypha.html

I'm sorry, I failed to see the homosexual sin one mentioned in that post. LOL

 

[davedjy]

Isa 6:
9] And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not.
[10] Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed.

Now you are just plain judging and trolling...wow

 

[angelmom01]

No, he didn't. Man was created sinless but with free will. Could we truly love God if we were forced to?


Being created with free will is not the same as being created sinful. God is not the author of sin!

WHAT?

God doesn't force us to love Him, we love Him because we KNOW Him.

If man sinned then he was capable of sinning.

If he was capable of sinning then he was created that way by God, who is his creator.

That does not make God the author of sin; it was MAN who sinned. And man sinned because he was NOT made perfect and sinless but was made SUBJECT TO VANITY, UNWILLINGLY.

Rom 8:20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,

God is creatING man in His image; that is the END result, not the starting point. God declared THE END from the beginning, calling those things THAT AREN'T as though THEY ARE.

Isa 46:9-10 Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, 10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:

Adam and Eve didn't even have a knowledge of good and evil until AFTER they partook of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. It was THEN that God said:

Gen 3:22 ... the man IS BECOME AS ONE OF US, to know good and evil: ...:

So man was not "as one of us" BEFORE he had that knowledge, so how was man creatED (past tense) "in our image" from the start?

Have you ever noticed that God first "formed" man out of the dust of the ground, then he "made" women (taking the women out of th man) and then he "created" THEM and blessed THEM and called THEIR name Adam?

It was THEM (the two joined together as ONE FLESH) that God called GOOD and who was said to be "created" IN THE IMAGE OF GOD. (Not the man alone or the woman alone.)

Men choose to sin because they are CAPABLE of sin; it is sin that dwells "in the flesh". Man was created NAKED (in need of a covering), they just didn't know it until that KNOWLEDGE came and their eyes were opened.

First the NATURAL, then the SPIRITUAL. We didn't take on the image of the "heavenly" first we took on the image of the "earthy" first. And THEN we are "conformed into the image of His Son".

We are BY NATURE the children of wrath. (Eph 2:3)

Isa 45:5-10 I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me: 6 That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else. 7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. 8 Drop down, ye heavens, from above, and let the skies pour down righteousness: let the earth open, and let them bring forth salvation, and let righteousness spring up together; I the LORD have created it. 9 Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands? 10 Woe unto him that saith unto his father, What begettest thou? or to the woman, What hast thou brought forth?

Reiterated in the NT:

Rom 9:18-24 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. 19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? 20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? 21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? 22What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: 23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, 24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

It is the POTTER who has the power over the clay and I do not for one minute believe that homosexuality is a "choice" or a "learned behavior" or the "result OF sin", even IF it is classified AS sin.

Who (especially among Christians) would CHOOSE something that most of society (especially among Christians) finds dispicable and/or sinful to the point of resulting in "eternal damnation"?

People suffer depression, live in denial, and commit SUICIDE over this.

All over something that they can freely choose to change just by making a better "choice"?

angelmom

 

[Markec]

And the second commandment of the Teaching; You shall not commit murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not commit pederasty[...]

If you don't know what pederasty means, check your dictonary.

 

[davedjy]

If it were not such a tragedy I would find this hilarious

Matthew 7: 1"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
3"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.

6"Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces.

 

[davedjy]

And the second commandment of the Teaching; You shall not commit murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not commit pederasty[...]

If you don't know what pederasty means, check your dictonary.

sexual relations between two males, esp. when one of them is a minor.

Where do you think the word "pedophile" came from?
This is talking about catamites (sex w/male boy slaves)

 

[chris777]

You pick and choose what you begin to follow. Jesus condoned slavery, so should you, because you only take historical things into count when you want to.

No I don't Because I admit I am a slave


I would still like to know how you cleans homosexuality, but Adultry, all manner of incest, and beastiality remain sin

 

[davedjy]

No I don't Because I admit I am a slave


I would still like to know how you cleans homosexuality, but Adultry, all manner of incest, and beastiality remain sin

You are a slave? ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Thanks for the laughs, I knew I wasn't the one losing it.
You will have to read the thread, I already explained why incest is still condmened and you will get your posts thrown out and a warning if you talk about the "B" sin, we don't talk about that here.

 

[chris777]

Matthew 7: 1"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
3"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.

6"Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces.

like I said its heart wrenching

 

[Markec]

davedjy you would do everything to justify homosexuality eh? If god himself came down and told you it is wrong, you would deny it, I guess. You would probably say something: "he didn't really mean it that way".

I hope your eyes open some day...

 

[intricatic]

It has EVERYTHING to do with what you are talking about. Sin is contrary to God, so even if it was a sin, it doesn't become idolatry. Point taken, end of =\

No, it has nothing to do with it because you either misunderstand me or are simply misrepresenting me.

I am not saying the antitype is the type. I am saying the antitype points to the type and the two share the same form. In literate terms; I am not saying homosexuality is idolatry, but I am saying that homosexuality and idolatry both reverse their respective antitype. If you want to take that as my saying that idolatry = homosexuality, I can't force you to see what I'm actually saying here, but it's an illogical twist to the concept I'm presenting, as it is clearly laid out in scripture.

For example;

What is Jesus talking about when he says this?

15 And Jesus said to them, “Can the friends of the bridegroom mourn as long as the bridegroom is with them? But the days will come when the bridegroom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast.
(Matthew 9)

I point to this not because it speaks to homosexuality directly, but because it attests to the form the Type is meant to take in relation to the antitype.

Or this, being a much more clear example;

9 Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls filled with the seven last plagues came to me and talked with me, saying, “Come, I will show you the bride, the Lamb’s wife.” (Revelation 21)

Do these things not point back to Genesis 2 and the marital covenant?

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.”
7 They said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?”
8 He said to them, “Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. 9 And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.”
(Matthew 19)

Is Jesus only referring to marriage between a man and a woman in this passage?

 

[chris777]

You are a slave? ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We are called to be slaves of Christ.

Thanks for the laughs, I knew I wasn't the one losing it.
You will have to read the thread, I already explained why incest is still condmened

is it in this particular thresd?

 

[davedjy]

We are called to be slaves of Christ.



is it in this particular thresd?

I'm not talking about THAT type of slavery, I'm talking about human to human slavery!

 

[davedjy]

No, it has nothing to do with it because you either misunderstand me or are simply misrepresenting me.

I am not saying the antitype is the type. I am saying the antitype points to the type and the two share the same form. In literate terms; I am not saying homosexuality is idolatry, but I am saying that homosexuality and idolatry both reverse their respective antitype. If you want to take that as my saying that idolatry = homosexuality, I can't force you to see what I'm actually saying here, but it's an illogical twist to the concept I'm presenting, as it is clearly laid out in scripture.

For example;

What is Jesus talking about when he says this?

I point to this not because it speaks to homosexuality directly, but because it attests to the form the Type is meant to take in relation to the antitype.

Or this, being a much more clear example;

Do these things not point back to Genesis 2 and the marital covenant?

Is Jesus only referring to marriage between a man and a woman in this passage?

In normal context you are correct, but when you are talking about someone who is only attracted to the same sex, your point CANNOT be taken into consideration!

 

[intricatic]

You are a slave? ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Thanks for the laughs, I knew I wasn't the one losing it.
You will have to read the thread, I already explained why incest is still condmened and you will get your posts thrown out and a warning if you talk about the "B" sin, we don't talk about that here.

We were freed from sin to be slaves to righteousness in Christ. And yet again we reach another widespread antitype.

20 For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness. 21 What fruit did you have then in the things of which you are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death. 22 But now having been set free from sin, and having become slaves of God, you have your fruit to holiness, and the end, everlasting life. 23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
(Romans 6)

 

[chris777]

I'm not talking about THAT type of slavery, I'm talking about human to human slavery!

Scriptural slavery in many ways sounds much better than capitalism.
capitalism is not all that far removed from serfdom, other than it gives those that are subject to others the illusion of freedom
I may have to do some research on it to elaborate fullybut thats another topic altogether



and I repeat about you reply to incest is it in this particular thread?

 

[intricatic]

In normal context you are correct, but when you are talking about someone who is only attracted to the same sex, your point CANNOT be taken into consideration!

And now the dialog breaks into emotional appeal.

Can you prove a subjective experience to be objective?

 

[davedjy]

And now the dialog breaks into emotional appeal.

Can you prove a subjective experience to be objective?

Yes, show me one same sex, loving monogamous relationship condemned in the Bible. What does that have to do w/emotional, it has to do w/facts.

Look at all the other sins, and you will see how they are all logical except for this one. This does not hurt anyone, and it would be a lie to say it hurts God. Why would it hurt God if you truly loved the person?

 

[intricatic]

Yes, show me one same sex, loving monogamous relationship condemned in the Bible. What does that have to do w/emotional, it has to do w/facts.

Look at all the other sins, and you will see how they are all logical except for this one. This does not hurt anyone, and it would be a lie to say it hurts God. Why would it hurt God if you truly loved the person?

You're relying on the foundational idea that same-sex attraction is innate. This is why I asked for you to prove a subjective experience to be objective.

I've showed you a large mass of consistent evidence towards exactly what you're asking about. I need not provide any more.

 

[davedjy]

Scriptural slavery in many ways sounds much better than capitalism.
capitalism is not all that far removed from serfdom, other than it gives those that are subject to others the illusion of freedom
I may have to do some research on it to elaborate fullybut thats another topic altogether



and I repeat about you reply to incest is it in this particular thread?

It's because it doesn't refer to it as an "abomination" o(tow'ebah). It just says: 6 " 'No one is to approach any close relative to have sexual relations. I am the LORD..