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.
Eating Lobster/shellfish isn't good for you anyway typically, because they go to the bathroom in their shells all their lives, that is why God told them not to eat shellfish.
it's probably still not a good idea, but again we are not under the Jewish Law. But again, that doesn't mean that we can live in sin.
No, you're interpreting. Every time you read the bible you're interpreting. It's very dishonest to claim otherwise.God states the criteria, not man. We are merely sharing what He has said, so that people don't listen to the wrong people and end up following "another Jesus" one different from the one whom Paul preached and end up where they don't want to go.
Can one of you put all Romans 1 in proper context for me?
Not the "21st century western" context but the "time and culture in which it was written" context?
If God's purpose for every person is to "be fruitful and multiply", then celibacy would be just as bad as homosexuality. But if you don't believe that celibacy is bad, then it's illogical to use this argument against homosexuality.God created them MALE and FEMALE from the beginning, and told them to be fruitful and multiply. God's purpose for man has not changed.
It can speak of homosexuality by describing the act - men lusting after men! How is this so hard to believe? It's hard to believe because you do not want to believe it. I didn't like believing what I was doing was sin either - but being convicted, I gave it up.Alright. Three questions:
1. Who are the people mentioned in verses 18-23?
2. How were their actions relevant to what was going on in that city at the time?
3. How can the bible "speak" against homosexuality when the concept of sexual orientation didn't exist at the time?
Because this is how homosexuals argue about it all the time. The Bible is not evidence enough so they find all the liberal theologians who talk about luuuuuuv as though the NT didn't have 3-5 words for different types of love. Love does not make an act righteous.Wow, this thread is crazy. Some people actually think that "you know in your heart that I'm right and you're wrong, you just don't want to admit it" is a valid debate argument. Is it even possible to have a discussion with someone who says something like that?
But homosexuality isn't about "men lusting after men", but about two people of the same sex falling in love and forming a relationship which is identical to a heterosexual relationshipIt can speak of homosexuality by describing the act - men lusting after men! How is this so hard to believe? It's hard to believe because you do not want to believe it. I didn't like believing what I was doing was sin either - but being convicted, I gave it up.
Please, pray tell me, where is any reference to temple prostitutes? Paul is very clear about his audience in other letters - why in Romans do you believe that he's obscure?So when Paul was writing specifically about temple prostitutes, he was actually lying and meant that the behavior of the temple prostitutes was applicable to everyone ever?
edit:
ContentInHim, please justify your statement that the concepts of homosexuality and sexual orientation, which didn't exist until recently, actually did exist back then.
Baloney - it's about lust that God says is not good. Same as with sex outside of marriage.But homosexuality isn't about "men lusting after men", but about two people of the same sex falling in love and forming a relationship which is identical to a heterosexual relationship
I disagree with you opinion... I believe that sin is something opposite to love, so love can't be sinful, in the same was as light can't be blackBecause this is how homosexuals argue about it all the time. The Bible is not evidence enough so they find all the liberal theologians who talk about luuuuuuv as though the NT didn't have 3-5 words for different types of love. Love does not make an act righteous.
And Paul said not to marry. Many people marry, have children and are widowed or divorced and do not marry again. So what?If God's purpose for every person is to "be fruitful and multiply", then celibacy would be just as bad as homosexuality. But if you don't believe that celibacy is bad, then it's illogical to use this argument against homosexuality.
But the lust in a homosexual relationship is no different than the lust in a heterosexual relationship.Baloney - it's about lust that God says is not good. Same as with sex outside of marriage.Your definitions have absolutely no Biblical basis.
If you ever read the Bible, you might discover that you are wrong. Yours is a typical New Age belief which doesn't surprise me.I disagree with you opinion... I believe that sin is something opposite to love, so love can't be sinful, in the same was as light can't be black
Lust is wrong - sex within the context of marriage is love!But the lust in a homosexual relationship is no different than the lust in a heterosexual relationship.
And Paul said not to marry. Many people marry, have children and are widowed or divorced and do not marry again. So what?
ContentInHim said:Please, pray tell me, where is any reference to temple prostitutes? Paul is very clear about his audience in other letters - why in Romans do you believe that he's obscure?
The Bible says that the whole law can be summed up as "love your neighbor as yourself". It seems that it's the spirit of the law. Homosexual relationship doesn't break that in any way.If you ever read the Bible, you might discover that you are wrong. Yours is a typical New Age belief which doesn't surprise me.
Well, since homosexual and heterosexual relationships are the same, then there's love in both kinds of relationships.Lust is wrong - sex within the context of marriage is love!
Is Paul God?
Did someone say Paul was God?
2 Corinthians 11:3-4
"But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him."
Well, that's kind of the point. Back then there was a lot of unclean stuff that could kill you, like pork, seafood, and anal sex. Nowadays, not so much.
No, you're interpreting. Every time you read the bible you're interpreting. It's very dishonest to claim otherwise.
And you are deceiving and being deceived.
Romans 1:24-32
Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
As I said before, it is not the parts that are unclear that I believe those who want to remain in their sins are having trouble understanding.
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?