How Homophobic Are You?

[EvangelicalChristian]

Guess we'll just have to disagree over our individual biblical interpretations. I just don't see how consentual, monogomous homosexual relationships are condemned under Christ's new covenant. If you do, well, thats your prerogative, but it doesn't sound like your being particularly condemnatory of others, so I can respect your opinion, even without agreeing with it

Just as I can and do respect yours. I don't agree with it of course but that's ok I don't assert that one must believe as I do.

 

[brightmorningstar]

To EnemyPartyII
They all do. Men wanting sex with men is waning a homosexual union not a herosexual one, or are you suggesting homosexual is not same-sex attraction? I think you will find the dictionary says it is.

No, none of the cited verses refer to homosexual UNION...

So men with men must be heterosexual. Sorry I can’t communicate with you as our definitions of words are opposite.
Homosexual unions are pagan idolatry according to Leviticus 18 & 20, and Romans 1
.

But the Bible never, ever, either pro or anti, specifically mentions homosexual unions, that being, monogomous unions analogous to heterosexual marriage

That’s nonsense, the Bible countenances man and woman in marriage so that’s marriage, marriage is always what you would call heterosexual. The Bible condemns same-sex unions which is what you call homosexual unions.
So the terms heterosexual and homosexual that you use are inaccurate and unhelpful when understanding the Bible. They are gay and lesbian thinking not Godly and Biblical.

 

[EvangelicalChristian]

I second EnemyParty11's comment as to your posts being polite and respectful.

Thank you, I have enjoyed the conversation thus far.

I would say that you're a rare exception in regard to your not holding negative views on homosexuality prior to your reading of the Bible. Actually, I'm a tad cynical of many professed Christians in regard to all manner of their 'beliefs' ...especially in regard to this issue. If the truth be known the majority of Christians would have no idea where to locate the scriptures that supposedly speak of homosexuality. Most have only heard over and over and over again that the Bible condemns homosexuality until it's become a part of their thinking. This impression has been implanted into their minds over a lengthy period of time and it's doubtful that many would have arrived at that point by virtue of their own research.

Just recently on another thread the Bereans were being discussed. They (the biblical Bereans) are kind of my heroes. I can understand trusting your pastor as I trust mine; but any claim to of a Scriptural precept must be scrutinized. Anything less is at best laziness and at worse dangerous. That's how cults are formed.

 

[David Brider]

Men wanting sex with men is wanting a homosexual union not a herosexual one

Do you make the assumption that if someone is physically/romantically attracted to another person, they automatically want to have sex with that person? If so, on what do you base that assumption?

David.

 

[brightmorningstar]

To David Brider,

Do you make the assumption that if someone is physically/romantically attracted to another person, they automatically want to have sex with that person? If so, on what do you base that assumption

Yes, in what ways can one be pysically attracted to another person?
But my comment was.
Men wanting sex with men is wanting a homosexual union not a heterosexual one.
Do you think men wanting sex with men is a homosexual or a heterosexual union?

 

[David Brider]

Yes, in what ways can one be pysically attracted to another person?

There's just being attracted to someone. Y'know, that thing where you see someone and you think, "gosh, they're pretty/cute/handsome/hunky/gorgeous/beautiful/rather pleasant to look at/whatever". It's not the same thing as wanting to have sex with that person. Well, not necessarily. Certainly not in my experience. Sure, there are probably some people whose first thought on seeing someone to whom they're attracted is "ooh, I'd like to have sex with that person", but for most people I think love is far more important than lust. Y'know, you get to know a person, find out what makes them tick; hopefully find there's a mutual attraction. Start out on the relationship ladder - start dating, and that, if you're lucky, leads to courting, which in turn might lead to getting engaged, and then to getting married, and hopefully living the rest of your natural life with that person. And for some - many - people, somewhere along the line, realise that you're so in love with each other that one of the best ways of expressing that love is through the act of physical sex. But that - and the desire for it - might not occur until many years into a happy relationship.

But my comment was.

Men wanting sex with men is wanting a homosexual union not a heterosexual one.
Do you think men wanting sex with men is a homosexual or a heterosexual union?

As I don't think that homosexuality is anything like as simplistic as "men wanting sex with men" (or indeed women wanting sex with women), I'm not sure I could answer that question.

Do you think heterosexuality is all about men wanting sex with women (or vice versa)?

David.

 

[Floatingaxe]

Just do the reading, who knows, something might be learned.

Anything worth learning regarding holy living is from God's word, not historical accounts of immorality.

 

[Floatingaxe]

I'm not going to accept that my lifestyle is sinful just because of some verses scribbled on some ancient goatskins. I want to know WHY your God considers it sinful.

We don't need to know why. That kind of request is typical of the spoiled child asking his mommy, "Why?" all the time! When we are aware of the extreme love of God for us personally and His sacrifice for our freedom from sin's devastating addiction on us, our minds, our bodies and our very life, we don't have to ask Him why. We conform to his edicts with gladness and gratefulness that He would care enough to save us from our sin!

If God's word isn't enough for you, then whose word is? Now THAT is the question!

 

[Wiccan_Child]

We don't need to know why. That kind of request is typical of the spoiled child asking his mommy, "Why?" all the time! When we are aware of the extreme love of God for us personally and His sacrifice for our freedom from sin's devastating addiction on us, our minds, our bodies and our very life, we don't have to ask Him why. We conform to his edicts with gladness and gratefulness that He would care enough to save us from our sin!

The point, I think, is that without a reasonable explanation for why a certain thing is condemned, one can be quite sure indeed that the condemnation is a misinterpretation, or a mistranlation, or a result of some other error. Rather than a correct, albeit baffling, legalistic condemnation.

If God's word isn't enough for you, then whose word is? Now THAT is the question!

Yours, apparently. People have explained time and again why you keep putting your word above God's, why your prejudices and presupposed beliefs are antithetical to Christian theology and morality.

But that's blind faith for ya.

 

[Andreusz]

We don't need to know why. That kind of request is typical of the spoiled child asking his mommy, "Why?" all the time!

I would appreciate it if you would stop comparing me to a child.

When we are aware of the extreme love of God for us personally and His sacrifice for our freedom from sin's devastating addiction on us,

I cannot be aware of his sacrifice if I don't understand the basis on which he decides what is sin and what isn't.

If God's word isn't enough for you, then whose word is? Now THAT is the question!

The argument from authority -- a common logical fallacy. I accept evidence and testable propositions.

 

[kiwimac]

Anything worth learning regarding holy living is from God's word, not historical accounts of immorality.

Then you will simply be putting your head in the sand and also failing to contribute to this conversation. Please note that it is YOU that is deciding this is immorality not the church.

 

[Floatingaxe]

The point, I think, is that without a reasonable explanation for why a certain thing is condemned, one can be quite sure indeed that the condemnation is a misinterpretation, or a mistranlation, or a result of some other error. Rather than a correct, albeit baffling, legalistic condemnation.

Well, God isn't guilty of making baffling, legalistic commands.

Yours, apparently. People have explained time and again why you keep putting your word above God's, why your prejudices and presupposed beliefs are antithetical to Christian theology and morality.

But that's blind faith for ya.

That's bull of course. I agree with God's word and that is exactly where I come from. My word is in harmony with His. Yours is not...in fact, yours is rife with prejudice, man-made beliefs and are all anti-God.

 

[Floatingaxe]

I would appreciate it if you would stop comparing me to a child. I have been reprimanded by the moderators for responding to your rudeness with rudeness, but if you carry on like this, I will tell you what I think of you, and it will not be pleasant.

I calls 'em as I sees 'em. It is precisely like a child's mantra of, "Why, why, why?" I'm not being rude.

I cannot be aware of his sacrifice if I don't understand the basis on which he decides what is sin and what isn't.

You are not aware of the sacrifice that Jesus made for your sin? Jesus opted to be beaten beyond recognition and to be jeered at and spat upon, and finally nailed, naked to a cross, bleeding and broken for you so that you could have the forgiveness of God and a relationship with Him. He gives you a life.

God gives us a conscience for a reason, and on top of that, the Holy Spirit shows us what sin is. Reading the Bible is the basic way in which you can know the particulars. Try it.

The argument from authority -- a common logical fallacy. I accept evidence and testable propositions.

Evidence is found at the cross. It is arrogance that needs testable propositions (and other big words like that). We live by faith. It is a real thing.

 

[Floatingaxe]

Then you will simply be putting your head in the sand and also failing to contribute to this conversation. Please note that it is YOU that is deciding this is immorality not the church.

No, it is you who refuses to accept what God says in favour of what wicked man says.

 

[EvangelicalChristian]

Anything worth learning regarding holy living is from God's word, not historical accounts of immorality.

I've gotta agree with this!

Well said Floatingaxe.

 

[kiwimac]

No, it is you who refuses to accept what God says in favour of what wicked man says.

What I refuse to accept is that it is YOU who gets to define what God says, FloatingAxe.

 

[Floatingaxe]

What I refuse to accept is that it is YOU who gets to define what God says, FloatingAxe.

It is always amusing to me to see how those who follow the secular world view take it so personal when they are opposed in their views!

No--I follow Jesus Christ alone, as do all born again Christians who want to serve Him alone. His Word is my authority. I am pleased and honoured to explain it to those here who desperately need the truth of it.

You are refusing the Word of God when you embrace homosexuality and homosexual marriage. It is an anti-God stance.

God's Word and His mind on any matter is not hard to know. He makes it easy enough for a child to know.

 

[KCKID]

Well, God isn't guilty of making baffling, legalistic commands.

No? Have you actually read your Bible, Floatingaxe? There are many commands and instructions given by God to His people that fly in the face of decent human beings. You obviously condone slaughter, genocide, rape, etc. as long as it's in the name of God.

That's bull of course. I agree with God's word and that is exactly where I come from. My word is in harmony with His. Yours is not...in fact, yours is rife with prejudice, man-made beliefs and are all anti-God.

Ooh, can't you just feel the Christian love, not to mention humbleness, coming from these posts ...?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Well, God isn't guilty of making baffling, legalistic commands.

Indeed. Which makes me wonder why you continue to interpret God's word to yield baffling, legalistic commands.

That's bull of course. I agree with God's word and that is exactly where I come from.

But that's just it: you don't. Like I said, you have been repeatedly shown why God's word doesn't say what you think it says. You interpretation (and, indeed, translation) is antithetical to what Jesus preached.

My word is in harmony with His. Yours is not...in fact, yours is rife with prejudice, man-made beliefs and are all anti-God.

Try not to change the subject. I make no claims to be a Christian; you, however, do.

 

[kiwimac]

It is always amusing to me to see how those who follow the secular world view take it so personal when they are opposed in their views!

No--I follow Jesus Christ alone, as do all born again Christians who want to serve Him alone. His Word is my authority. I am pleased and honoured to explain it to those here who desperately need the truth of it.

You are refusing the Word of God when you embrace homosexuality and homosexual marriage. It is an anti-God stance.

God's Word and His mind on any matter is not hard to know. He makes it easy enough for a child to know.

However, YOU do not get to decide what is and is not acceptable to God, YOU do not get a free pass to consider your cultural prejudices as equal to God's commands and YOU most certainly do not speak for all Christians.