What is the proper Christian response to a homosexual?

[LesleyDuckworth]

"Helped out financially with Jesus' ministry??" That's new one for me, but don't want to get into what is being taught out there in Bible Schools etc. Most definately Mary Magdaline was there for the cruicifixation of CHrist, and the first to bear witness to the empty tomb when Jesus ressurected. While she was never called a "prostitute" she was referred to as with with "questionable character". Through all the interpretations, she has now been referred to simply "the prostitute". Of course, there are those that say she married Chrsit, had kids, their relatives living in France....let's just not go there.

I was not bashing you for your beliefs, I simply making a comment. Being from the Bible Belt, and being a fundie, you can not see how it looks to those on the outside looking in. Of course there are those that fit the entire spectrum. As you know, it is the frindge that gets the attention, and as such, it is the fundamentalist "frindge" that has given fundamentalists the bad name. If you were to meet an Islamic and they told you they were a fundamentalist...how would you react? Perhaps not as violent, but Christian fundamentalist, by it's true definition, and by the very definitoin in this forum, is a militant orthadox. Those "3 things" in and of themselves are not shocking nor necessary bad. One can totally believe in the fundamental teachings of the Bible, and be conservative, and be in the Bible Belt...It is when those three positions are taken to an exteme, and then those extremes hijack what they were originally meant to be, is when it is a bit of an issue. Unfortunately, being on the outside looking in, reading many of these posts, etc..I would have to say that you sound more tolerant than most.

She married Christ, had kids, and their descendants live in France?
Rick! This is not the Bible! It is the Da Vinci Code! lol
You people really have no shame do you?

 

[UberLutheran]

Hi. I would first like to say that in no way do I dislike or judge homosexuals (hate the sin, love the sinner). I show them love. I try to to let them see Jesus when they talk to me.

That being said, homosexuality is quite clearly a sin and an abomination in God's eyes. There is plenty of Scripture to support this throughout the entire Bible.

Some parts of the Book of Romans come to mind for me right now:

Rom 1:21
For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.

Rom 1:22
Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools

Rom 1:23
and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

Rom 1:24
Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.

Rom 1:25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator–who is forever praised. Amen.

Rom 1:26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones.

Rom 1:27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

Rom 1:28 Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done.

Rom 1:29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips,

Rom 1:30 slanderers, God‑haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents;

Rom 1:31 they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless.

Rom 1:32 Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

Boy -- am I ever glad that heterosexuals don't do any of these things!

Where would society be if heterosexuals were like that?

 

[ReformedChapin]

Boy -- am I ever glad that heterosexuals don't do any of these things!

Where would society be if heterosexuals were like that?

Considering homosexuality is deviation from heterosexuality it's not the same.

 

[UnitedInChrist]

Luke 8:1-3​

And it came to pass afterward, that he went throughout every city and village, preaching and shewing the glad tidings of the kingdom of God: and the twelve were with him,​

2And certain women, which had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities, Mary called Magdalene, out of whom went seven devils, 3And Joanna the wife of Chuza Herod's steward, and Susanna, and many others, which ministered unto him of their substance. ​

Haven't been to any Bible Schools, and again I would have to ask why that would be bad if I had?​

Mary Magdalene is a primarily Christian figure who is mentioned several times in areas of significance in the New Testament Gospels. Her identity is often conflated with those of other women, which may have led to her faulty identification as a reformed prostitute.​

http://www.magdalene.org/persp_trad.php​

Mary Magdalene​

Meet the real friend and follower of Jesus.​

by Liz Curtis Higgs​

Was she the wife of Jesus, the mother of his children, or the Holy Grail, as The Da Vinci Code claims? Or the repentant prostitute of Jesus Christ Superstar, throwing herself at the Master's feet and singing, "I Don't Know How to Love Him"?​

According to Scripture, Mary Magdalene was none of the above.​

http://www.christianitytoday.com/tcw/2006/003/6.28.html​

If you would have checked the links you would have seen that this info was gotten from them and from reading the bible, which you can do without going to Bible School.​

Yes, she was there at the crucifixion and she was at the empty tomb after Jesus was ressurected.​

There are other pages which come right out and tell how it has been erroniously thought that she was a prostitute and/or had a questionable background or questionable character as you call it. If you have scriptures or other articles that tell of this questionable character I would love to study them, Thanks.​

Tolerant?​

I call, what I believe a sin is, a sin and I will not sugarcoat it so as not to step on toes, but in stating those things I have to remember that we all are sinners. That we all have sinned and will sin again till we are totally changed at our death or His return. In doing this I have been called a hater, bigot, etc.​

I also believe that it is my duty to speak the truth as I know it, and to plant seeds for the Holy Spirit to harvest for the Kingdom of God. I won't stop doing that because someone calls me names or gets upset, unless I am led to stop by the Lord. I left this forum several weeks ago because we were just saying the same thing over and over again. We were attacking eachother and not the subject/homosexuality, and that is wrong and gets us nowhere. IMO.​

Anyhow I just stopped by to see if anything new was going on, and I see that it isn't. I noticed your post about Mary Magdalene and since I had just studied about her, on my own, using the Bible and on-line sites, I thought I would post some of what I found and how most scholars now believe she was not a prostitute.​

Good Day All.​

I'm not up on Mary Magdelane, so I can't really comment on her at all other than the briefs things I said. I didn't start the thread...I just added to it. Was she a prostitute....who knows. By the standards 2000 years ago, she could have been. I have no idea. "Questionable character" could have simply meant that maybe she worked on the Sabbath...who knows. What's a great point though is look how through translation she is known as a "prostitute". Questionable Character = prostitute? Says who? The ones teaching the Bible. She is known as that, and quite possibly never even was. But for those that say the bible is infallible and correct and should be taken at face value, then they're the ones that would have the problem. Most others probably wouldn't see it as an issue at all.
People seem to forget something very critical about the Bible. MAN wrote it, not Christ himself. While they are inspired men of God...look at all the inspiration people on this website have. What if they were to gather in a new form, and put out the next edition of the NIV or KJV? God only knows what it would say. (no pun intended)

 

[UberLutheran]

Considering homosexuality is deviation from heterosexuality it's not the same.

You're right.

I keep forgetting: heterosexuals don't sin.

Or if they do, it's only a little bitty sin — certainly not like two men having sex in bed.

Like the heterosexual guy in Virginia who killed 33 people. It would have been so much worse for everybody if he'd been gay.

 

[UnitedInChrist]

Rick, Rick, Rick...
I am a Christian and I am from the bible belt! Personally, I can't see how you people claim to be Christians yet are so disrespectful to God's word.
As the old joke goes,
God made Adam & Eve
He DID NOT make Adam & Steve.....
Do you think that God actually made sex for two men? Please don't tell me your thinking has gotten that warped!
What would I ever do if I had a child that was homosexual? I'd cry probably till my deathbed! But I would not let them corrupt me and stop me from getting to heaven, same as I will not let this group trying to disrupt these forums.
I think there is some major spiritual warfare going on within your souls, those of you who seem to think it is ok to have sex with your same gender. It is sick! The scripture clearly says that those people will NOT go to heaven. The Bible says it Rick! I didn't make the rules!
God did!

Lesley,
Let me make something perfectly clear here for the sake of this arguement getting completely distorted. NO ONE has ever said, nor claimed, that God didn't make Adam and Eve. OF COURSE man was made for women in order to produce children. Why would you think homosexuals don't believe in male/female relationships? God also made MANY male/female relationships where they can NOT conceive, or CHOOSE not to conceive. Is that "sick"? That's nonsense. But guess what God made Adam, and Eve, and Cain, and Abel, and "Steve" and everyone else that is walking this planet today..including plant life, animals, mamals, etc... God has NEVER EVER mentioned SEX in the bible EVER!!! What don't u get with that? MAN has brought the sex act into the picture. You speak as if Christ took a pen to paper and wrote the book that you read today. HE DID NOT!! Man was INSPIRED by God and wrote the Bible. The FIRST ENGLISH version wasn't even written until the 16th century....1600 YEARS after the death of Christ. The OT alone was written THOUSANDS of years before Christ even came to Earth. To say that my thinking is warped, I'd ask you what your thinking is when you say such things as "you people". Your claim is that YOU are the Christian and that we are not. Guess what..You're wrong to me and many others. For the simple reason we disagree with you, you prove the point of fundamentalists being the "self-rightous, judgemental know it alls" I am not going to sit in judgement of anyone. If there is anything I've learned as a gay man is that I am judged nearly 24/7 by "christians" that think they know the truth and condemn everyone else. THAT my dear is what is sick, pervert, warped and twisted. For me....when I stand in judgement of God...I will be judged by God himself. IF through this life I should adopt a child as a gay man, give the child a good life, cherish them, and accept them for who they are as my child, and teach them about God, as God would want me to do, it is something I would be proud of. For those that say "cry to my deathbed" and "not let them corrupt" me of their own flesh and blood...etc...please tell me where in Christianity that behavior comes into play because for the life of me, it defines the complete opposite of what I would ever want to be. Also, through the Grace of GOD I will meet my God in heaven, and won't be told by another person that "those people will not". Along those lines, with your comments regarding "spiritual warfare"...you really need to take care of yourself and not stand in judgement of those on here that you disagree with. This forum is for the Christian debate on homosexuality. It is EXACTLY what this forum is about. As for what is "sick"...child abuse is sick to me. Spousal abuse is sick to me. Abortion is sick to me. Many things are "sick" to me...to others they are not. I find the rage in your comments to be a bit "sick", but that's me.

 

[savedandhappy1]

[

I'm not up on Mary Magdelane, so I can't really comment on her at all other than the briefs things I said. I didn't start the thread...I just added to it. Was she a prostitute....who knows. By the standards 2000 years ago, she could have been. I have no idea. "Questionable character" could have simply meant that maybe she worked on the Sabbath...who knows. What's a great point though is look how through translation she is known as a "prostitute". Questionable Character = prostitute? Says who? The ones teaching the Bible. She is known as that, and quite possibly never even was. But for those that say the bible is infallible and correct and should be taken at face value, then they're the ones that would have the problem. Most others probably wouldn't see it as an issue at all.

Translations have nothing to do with the errors of the many Marys, so there is no point made here.

She is never called a questionable character in the Bible, if you would read some of the links given, and or if you like I can give you the 14 verses she is mentioned in the 4 gospels. The Bible has it right and it is a misunderstanding by us that have people believing she was a prostitute. Someone said it and that made it so, she is also confused as the one who put the perfume on Jesus, and some think she was Martha and Lazarus sisters.

I prefer to read the scriptures myself and pray for understanding. I will listen and consider what a preacher or teacher says, but I don't take their word for it. I guess that is what makes some of us different.

People seem to forget something very critical about the Bible. MAN wrote it, not Christ himself. While they are inspired men of God...look at all the inspiration people on this website have. What if they were to gather in a new form, and put out the next edition of the NIV or KJV? God only knows what it would say. (no pun intended)

Why would there need to be a next edition? The scriptures were written to give us the knowledge of how life began and then take us through to the end. They are not just some next edition. They are .......................................nevermind if I have to explain what the word of God is and why well..........

Good Day
​

 

[UnitedInChrist]

[​

Translations have nothing to do with the errors of the many Marys, so there is no point made here.​

She is never called a questionable character in the Bible, if you would read some of the links given, and or if you like I can give you the 14 verses she is mentioned in the 4 gospels. The Bible has it right and it is a misunderstanding by us that have people believing she was a prostitute. Someone said it and that made it so, she is also confused as the one who put the perfume on Jesus, and some think she was Martha and Lazarus sisters.​

I prefer to read the scriptures myself and pray for understanding. I will listen and consider what a preacher or teacher says, but I don't take their word for it. I guess that is what makes some of us different.​

Why would there need to be a next edition? The scriptures were written to give us the knowledge of how life began and then take us through to the end. They are not just some next edition. They are .......................................nevermind if I have to explain what the word of God is and why well..........​

Good Day​

Mary Magdalene is often referred to as a prostitute, but she was never called one in the New Testament. , "Migdal was a fishing town known, or so the legend goes, for its perhaps punning connection to hairdressers (medgaddlela) and women of questionable reputation. This is as close as we get to any clear evidence that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute"

Your points are all right on target which itself goes to show you what gets "lost in translation". As for the "next editon", I'll enlighten you since I assume you to believe that the Bible you are using now was written that way it appears, back in the time of the the apostles (NT) and the times of Moses (OT).

What you are reading now was in fact written in 1966 by a group of Christian leaders that formed a council in Chicago and drew their conclusions. The group, though not made up of official church representatives, was transdenominational. It was then delegated by the Palo Heights group to a self-governing body of 15. The body was made up of Anglican, Assemblies of God, Baptist, Brethren, Christian Reformed, Church of Christ, Evangelical Free, Lutheran, Mennonites, Methodists, Nazarene, Presbyterian, and Wesleyan (hmmm...where were the Catholics??..not sure). Their work then went to the General Editorial Committees, who then put it through more revisions. These revisions then went to be reviewed by The Committee on Bible Translations which then made further changes, and then was finally released for publication. In short, the BIble went through 3 revisions and examined for it's "English style". If you read the preface to your Bible, all of this is in there, with the final note of .... "it is believed that it contans the divine answers to the deepest needs of humanity, that is sheds unique light on our path in a dark world, and sets forth our way to eternal well-being." In 1973 the NIV was finally published as you see it today. SInce then, numerous revisions have been received from various sources. They are carefully considered by the Committee and a number of them were adopted and in 1983 appeared in printings after that date. The final entry in the Bible preface clearly states...and I quote.... "LIKE ALL TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE, THEY ARE MADE BY IMPERFECT MAN...."

So in short, this is what you are reading. It is living book that has been revised and will no doubt be revised again.

 

[David Brider]

You know as well as I know that its mentioned in the Old and New Testament. I'm sure you've read the scriptures 100 times.

Enough times to know what they say, yes.

Homosexual sex and Homosexuality is different? Come on and give me a break here! You are twisting things around to make yourself feel better.

Not at all. Homosexuality is being attracted to people of the same gender as oneself. One can be a homosexual and not be engaged in homosexual sex, same as one can be a heterosexual and not be engaged in heterosexual sex. That being the case, can it really be said same-sex physical attraction is sinful? Note, I'm not talking about "lust", which is clearly a different thing from mere physical attraction (if it weren't, then all heterosexuals would be guilty of heterosexual lust).

Facts are its a sin.

As i've said - homosexual sex possibly, depending on exactly how you interpret a very few verses (it's spoken of explicitly in only about half a dozen places in Scripture, and even then that depends on exactly how one interprets those verses; were the references in Deuteronomy to homosexual lovers in the sense that we'd understand today, or to shrine prostitutes? What did Paul mean when he used the word "arsenokoites"? What exactly were the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah as explicitly stated in the Biblical texts? It's not as cut and dried as you appear to think. This site contains an overview of the debate with contributions from all sides. Somewhere I've got some notes and references that I'll hopefully dig up before too long, but hopefully that'll do for the time being). But there's no grounds for stating that homosexual attraction is a sin.

I read that sin should not be something that Christians tolerate, but something that they speak out against.

I've read that too. Not in the Bible, though.

I think one of the big problems with some sections of Christianity is that they seem all too ready to address sin in other people - and even then, not all sin. Homosexuals and/or homosexuality seem to be just nice easy targets. I don't see any Christian leaders making a big issue of (say) lying, or greed, or slander, or pride. Why is that? (Probably, I suspect, because they'd lose half of their congregations...)

Yes, sin is something we should be totally intolerant of. But let's deal with our own sin first. If we've got any time left after that, then we can start targeting other people's sin.

You know its wrong. You know that the Bible which is God's word...

And the Bible calls itself God's word where exactly?

...unless you'd like to go against that too says that homosexuality is an abomination of God.

No, it says that two men who lie with men as with women have committed an abomination. Which - apart from the need I highlighted earlier, to distinguish between homosexuality and homosexual sex, flags up another couple of problems. Firstly - as at least one other contributor to this thread* has pointed out - how exactly does a man "lie with a man as with a woman"? What exactly does that refer to?

And secondly, right about the same time Leviticus says that the two men who do this have committed an abomination, it says that they should be put to death.

So...let's turn it round a bit. If you haven't put any homosexuals to death lately, does that mean that you're tolerating sin?

Hmm.

David.

*Or it could have been another thread. They all get a bit samey, have you noticed that? ETA: Yes, it was another thread.

 

[Der Alte]

Good. You've made your position clear. By the logic you use, no repentance and no forgiveness is possible, any temptation to sin (by your definition of sin) is grounds for barring someone from church permanently.

Very conciliatory, Polycarp, you read one post out-of-context, then get on my case, evidently, without knowing, or caring, what has been discussed before, not even in this thread, let alone other threads in this sub forum.

Should you actually read my discussions (plural) on this topic, you will note that I have confined myself almost exclusively to lexical, grammatical, and historical exegesis of the relevant scripture. Here are links to a series of posts in another thread where I cite evidence from the ancient Jews, the Talmud; ancient versions, such as the LXX, the writings of the early church fathers, Jewish Encyclopedia, Greek lexicons, etc.


http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=33939297&postcount=65

http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=33963966&postcount=67

http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=33964023&postcount=68

http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=33936957&postcount=59

http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=33937111&postcount=60

I would be most grateful if you could show me where I have ever stated or implied “no repentance and no forgiveness is possible, any temptation to sin (by your definition of sin) is grounds for barring someone from church permanently?” And when, not if, you are unable to do so I expect an immediate apology. I did reply to one post, which touched on repentance, etc., by quoting Jesus speaking to the adulteress in John 8, “Go and sin no more.”

I've done those studies. I've reviewed the Scriptures. I do not buy the most extreme positions that apologists for homosexuality take on them. But I agree with the majority of Biblical critics and scholars that they are not as clearcut as your post suggests.

Good. Then perhaps you could share with me some of your “studies?” The links above are to quite a bit of the evidence I have, and I have more. None of the members posting pro-homosexual arguments here, have even tried to provide similar credible, verifiable, historical evidence. Perhaps you can, or is that not part of your agenda?

“I agree with the majority of Biblical critics and scholars” Logical fallacy, appeal to anonymous authority. OTOH, I cite, by name, the authorities I quote, e.g. the ancient Jews, the Talmud; ancient versions, such as the LXX, the writings of the early church fathers, Jewish Encyclopedia, Greek lexicons, etc., and provide links to the primary sources, in most cases.

And your post sounds like a hatemongering abuse of the Gospel in support of evil. Since it "walks like a duck and quacks like a duck"....

A vicious, slanderous, false accusation, which has no basis in fact. Try reading that sentence in the context of the preceding discussion. How can grammatical, lexical, and historical exegesis of scripture, which have not included any reference to penalties, punishment, repentance, barring someone from church, etc., have anything at all to do with your so-called “hatemongering abuse of the Gospel in support of evil?” If there is any hate mongering it must be you, because it is not me. But we both knew that didn’t we?

Matthew 7:2 and 7:12 -- enjoy being hoist with your own petard. (And you can thank me; better that I make that judgment than that the Lord do so at the last judgment; see Matthew 9:13 and 25:31-46.)

You even admit to violating scripture, so who died and made you a judge over me? It sounds like a prejudiced rant, throwing random, out of context scriptures at me, without any knowledge of/reference to anything I have posted, in support of someone’s extremely biased, presumptive agenda. Here is a scripture for you, Matt 7:5.

 

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]Your points are all right on target which itself goes to show you what gets "lost in translation". As for the "next editon", I'll enlighten you since I assume you to believe that the Bible you are using now was written that way it appears, back in the time of the the apostles (NT) and the times of Moses (OT).

What you are reading now was in fact written in 1966 by a group of Christian leaders that formed a council in Chicago and drew their conclusions. The group, though not made up of official church representatives, was transdenominational. It was then delegated by the Palo Heights group to a self-governing body of 15. The body was made up of Anglican, Assemblies of God, Baptist, Brethren, Christian Reformed, Church of Christ, Evangelical Free, Lutheran, Mennonites, Methodists, Nazarene, Presbyterian, and Wesleyan (hmmm...where were the Catholics??..not sure). Their work then went to the General Editorial Committees, who then put it through more revisions. These revisions then went to be reviewed by The Committee on Bible Translations which then made further changes, and then was finally released for publication. In short, the BIble went through 3 revisions and examined for it's "English style". If you read the preface to your Bible, all of this is in there, with the final note of .... "it is believed that it contans the divine answers to the deepest needs of humanity, that is sheds unique light on our path in a dark world, and sets forth our way to eternal well-being." In 1973 the NIV was finally published as you see it today. SInce then, numerous revisions have been received from various sources. They are carefully considered by the Committee and a number of them were adopted and in 1983 appeared in printings after that date. The final entry in the Bible preface clearly states...and I quote.... "LIKE ALL TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE, THEY ARE MADE BY IMPERFECT MAN...."

So in short, this is what you are reading. It is living book that has been revised and will no doubt be revised again.[/SIZE]

What if, like, myself and, many other people, one can read both Biblical languages, how does this whole folderol you just laid out apply then?

What about the O.T., for example, has it been "revised" and "revised again?" Ever hear of the Qumran and Dead Sea scrolls? Long story short, Q/DSS provides us with copies of the O.T., from Palestine, dating to ca. 100 BC. Proving that we have the same O.T. that Jesus used. Not changed! Not revised! Not corrupted!

And the N.T. we have about 23,000 manuscripts and it has been estimated that almost all of the N.T. can be reconstructed from citations in the ECF.

http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6068

 

[BigBadWlf]

You know as well as I know that its mentioned in the Old and New Testament. I'm sure you've read the scriptures 100 times.
Homosexual sex and Homosexuality is different? Come on and give me a break here! You are twisting things around to make yourself feel better. Whatever...
Facts are its a sin. I read that sin should not be something that Christians tolerate, but something that they speak out against.

the bible contains three hundred and sixty two instances where it declarers heterosexual sex a sin. if as you attest there is not difference between sexual orientation and sexual actions…then all heterosexuals are destined for hell…good news for the bisexuals I guess.

You know its wrong. You know that the Bible which is God's word unless you'd like to go against that too says that homosexuality is an abomination of God.
It is what it is.

but then...so is eating shellfish

 

[BigBadWlf]

Rick, Rick, Rick...
I am a Christian and I am from the bible belt! Personally, I can't see how you people claim to be Christians yet are so disrespectful to God's word.
As the old joke goes,
God made Adam & Eve
He DID NOT make Adam & Steve.....
Do you think that God actually made sex for two men? Please don't tell me your thinking has gotten that warped!
What would I ever do if I had a child that was homosexual? I'd cry probably till my deathbed! But I would not let them corrupt me and stop me from getting to heaven, same as I will not let this group trying to disrupt these forums.
I think there is some major spiritual warfare going on within your souls, those of you who seem to think it is ok to have sex with your same gender. It is sick! The scripture clearly says that those people will NOT go to heaven. The Bible says it Rick! I didn't make the rules!
God did!

Ahh...the old if one can't justify prejudice any other way just use an old cliché ploy

 

[BigBadWlf]

Do you believe that homosexuals have a place in heaven? I don't and the Bible in fact, says that!

Snicker at that all you want dear! You'll not be snickering on judgement day!

so you take delight in the condemning of an entire minority to hell based on nothing but your demand that God hate the same people that you have chosen to hate.

So whenever you speak, or whatever you do, remember that you will be judged by the law of love, the law that set you free. For there will be no mercy for you if you have not been merciful to others. But if you have been merciful, then God's mercy toward you will win out over his judgment against you." James 2:12-13

 

[BigBadWlf]

It doesn't matter if there is a "gay gene" or not, whether there is a biological disposition or not. First off, the evidence for that is extremely shaky - in fact nearly non-existant.

hundreds of peer reviewed studies showing that sexual orientation is inborn and a complete lack of ANY evidence showing that sexual orientation is learned, a choice, and/or the result of childhood experience is not shaky by any honest person's standards.

But guess what? For the sake of this discussion, I'll even grant you this point. For the purpose of our discussion here the "gay gene" does exist, and there is a biological disposition.

So what? Whether some are biologically pre-disposed to it or not, gay sex is still a sin. There are some people who are biologically succeptable to becoming alchoholics, that does not make drunkeness not a sin.

I have a very ballanced view of homosexuality, I have gay friends who know my position even. I show love to everyone, or do my best to at least. I support gay marriage, I welcome gays to attend my churches.

But the Bible is unambiguous, and it is God's Word.

That aside it does matter. To condemn an entire minority just because they are a minority makes the position of conservative Christians no different from racism.

Bigotry is bigotry no matter who it is directed against or how often one cites the bible in its defense.

 

[Sign Of The Fish Burger]

Do you believe that homosexuals have a place in heaven? I don't and the Bible in fact, says that!

Snicker at that all you want dear! You'll not be snickering on judgement day!

Do you didn't answer my question sweetheart... so let me ask it again.

Do you believe that the earth revolves around the sun???

 

[savedandhappy1]

Mary Magdalene is often referred to as a prostitute, but she was never called one in the New Testament. , "Migdal was a fishing town known, or so the legend goes, for its perhaps punning connection to hairdressers (medgaddlela) and women of questionable reputation. This is as close as we get to any clear evidence that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute"

Your points are all right on target which itself goes to show you what gets "lost in translation". As for the "next editon", I'll enlighten you since I assume you to believe that the Bible you are using now was written that way it appears, back in the time of the the apostles (NT) and the times of Moses (OT).

What you are reading now was in fact written in 1966 by a group of Christian leaders that formed a council in Chicago and drew their conclusions. The group, though not made up of official church representatives, was transdenominational. It was then delegated by the Palo Heights group to a self-governing body of 15. The body was made up of Anglican, Assemblies of God, Baptist, Brethren, Christian Reformed, Church of Christ, Evangelical Free, Lutheran, Mennonites, Methodists, Nazarene, Presbyterian, and Wesleyan (hmmm...where were the Catholics??..not sure). Their work then went to the General Editorial Committees, who then put it through more revisions. These revisions then went to be reviewed by The Committee on Bible Translations which then made further changes, and then was finally released for publication. In short, the BIble went through 3 revisions and examined for it's "English style". If you read the preface to your Bible, all of this is in there, with the final note of .... "it is believed that it contans the divine answers to the deepest needs of humanity, that is sheds unique light on our path in a dark world, and sets forth our way to eternal well-being." In 1973 the NIV was finally published as you see it today. SInce then, numerous revisions have been received from various sources. They are carefully considered by the Committee and a number of them were adopted and in 1983 appeared in printings after that date. The final entry in the Bible preface clearly states...and I quote.... "LIKE ALL TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE, THEY ARE MADE BY IMPERFECT MAN...."

So in short, this is what you are reading. It is living book that has been revised and will no doubt be revised again.

You have know idea how many or what Bibles, commentaries, websites, etc., that I read and/or study from. So again you are assuming that since I live in the bible belt, believe the Bible is infallible and without err, and that I am a conservative that I am reading certain things.

Believe it or not I use the brain God gave me, and study Greek translations and many other. I look back and see what the ancients taught, and again don't just take a preachers/teachers word for what the word says or means.

Here are just a few of the different sources I use to study to show myself approved a workman that need not be ashame.

1. The Zondervan Parallel New Testament in Greek and English Bible. (KJV, NIV, Greek Interlinear)
2. The Devotional Bible by Max Lucado, it's NCV.
3. The Naves Study Bible
4. Matthew Henry Commentary to go along with the Classical Commentaries which has around 8-10 different peoples understandings.
5. There is the BibleGateway.com with it's 20 different translations.
6. The Wycliffe Bible Commentary.
7. Then there is the computer, and way to many websites.
8. The Dead Sea Scrolls, By Michael Wise, Martin Abegg Jr., and Edward Cook

I go with the scriptures and not the doctrines of some denomination, as I have been accused of doing many times.

Here is one of the things I have studied, which was written way before 1966. In fact these are things that were believed and taught as far back as 151 AD.

What did early Christians believe about...?
(Before 400 AD)

Uninspired records of how early Christians worshipped and what doctrine they believed!

​

What did early Christians believe about Homosexuality!​

• 151 AD Justin Martyr "[W]e have been taught that to expose newly-born children is the part of wicked men; and this we have been taught lest we should do anyone harm and lest we should sin against God, first, because we see that almost all so exposed (not only the girls, but also the males) are brought up to prostitution. And for this pollution a multitude of females and hermaphrodites, and those who commit unmentionable iniquities, are found in every nation. And you receive the hire of these, and duty and taxes from them, whom you ought to exterminate from your realm. And any one who uses such persons, besides the godless and infamous and impure intercourse, may possibly be having intercourse with his own child, or relative, or brother. And there are some who prostitute even their own children and wives, and some are openly mutilated for the purpose of sodomy; and they refer these mysteries to the mother of the gods" (First Apology 27).
• 181 AD Theophilus of Antioch "Give studious attention to the prophetic writings [the Bible] and they will lead you on a clearer path to escape the eternal punishments and to obtain the eternal good things of God.. [God] will examine everything and will judge justly, granting recompense to each according to merit. To those who seek immortality by the patient exercise of good works, he will give everlasting life, joy, peace, rest, and all good things.. For the unbelievers and for the contemptuous, and for those who do not submit to the truth but assent to iniquity, when they have been involved in adulteries, and fornications, and homosexualities, and avarice, and in lawless idolatries, there will be wrath and indignation, tribulation and anguish; and in the end, such men as these will be detained in everlasting fire" (To Autolycus 1:14).
• 190 AD Clement of Alexandria "All honor to that king of the Scythians, whoever Anacharsis was, who shot with an arrow one of his subjects who imitated among the Scythians the mystery of the mother of the gods . . . condemning him as having become effeminate among the Greeks, and a teacher of the disease of effeminacy to the rest of the Scythians" … [According to Greek myth] Baubo [a female native of Elusis] having received [the goddess] Demeter hospitably, reached to her a refreshing draught; and on her refusing it, not having any inclination to drink (for she was very sad), and Baubo having become annoyed, thinking herself slighted, uncovered her shame, and exhibited her nudity to the goddess. Demeter is delighted with the sight--pleased, I repeat, at the spectacle. These are the secret mysteries of the Athenians; these Orpheus records" … "It is not, then, without reason that the poets call him [Hercules] a cruel wretch and a nefarious scoundrel. It were tedious to recount his adulteries of all sorts, and debauching of boys. For your gods did not even abstain from boys, one having loved Hylas, another Hyacinthus, another Pelops, another Chrysippus, another Ganymede. Let such gods as these be worshipped by your wives, and let them pray that their husbands be such as these--so temperate; that, emulating them in the same practices, they may be like the gods. Such gods let your boys be trained to worship, that they may grow up to be men with the accursed likeness of fornication on them received from the gods" (Exhortation to the Greeks 2).
• http://www.bible.ca/H-homosexuality.htm

Homosexuality may be a word that has not been around that long, but the act of homosexuality has. It also has been taught as a sin for as far back as I have found so far, which is around 100 AD.

We believe history books that are written about people like Alexander the Great, and other people from way back in history. Even tho these things weren't written till 400 hundred or more years after their deaths, but we refuse to believe things that were written 50 to 100 yrs., after Christs death.

Anyhow, I don't just read and believe things written and agreed on by the top denominations, or that are written from 1966 to the present time. Assuming that all people who don't agree with you, or that live in certain areas, are fundamentalist and conservative, don't know how or just don't use the brain God gave them to find the truth is, well.......................................... dare I say judgemental and wrong.

If I was a liar and a chronic one at that, would you as my brother of sister in Christ come to me as the Bible says to?

Would you lift me up in your prayers?

Would you show me how the Bible says that it is a sin and what that sin does?

If I was like this before I ask the Lord to save me, and in fact said that it wasn't a sin and needed no forgiveness would I really be saved?

If someone ask others who profess to be Christians if I can be saved while refusing to admit this sin, are they being judgemental?

Would I then be able to call anyone who did the above a hater and bigot for doing them?

Would I be able to say that they aren't showing the love of Christ because of their actions?

http://savedandhappy1.christianforums.com/​

 

[BigBadWlf]

If I was a liar and a chronic one at that, would you as my brother of sister in Christ come to me as the Bible says to?​

Would you lift me up in your prayers?​

Would you show me how the Bible says that it is a sin and what that sin does?​

If I was like this before I ask the Lord to save me, and in fact said that it wasn't a sin and needed no forgiveness would I really be saved?​

If someone ask others who profess to be Christians if I can be saved while refusing to admit this sin, are they being judgemental?​

Would I then be able to call anyone who did the above a hater and bigot for doing them?​

Would I be able to say that they aren't showing the love of Christ because of their actions?​

Would I justify and advocate discrimination against you…prevent you form having equal rights and legal protections?

No.

 

[BigBadWlf]

You have know idea how many or what Bibles, commentaries, websites, etc., that I read and/or study from. So again you are assuming that since I live in the bible belt, believe the Bible is infallible and without err, and that I am a conservative that I am reading certain things.​

Believe it or not I use the brain God gave me, and study Greek translations and many other. I look back and see what the ancients taught, and again don't just take a preachers/teachers word for what the word says or means.​

Here are just a few of the different sources I use to study to show myself approved a workman that need not be ashame.​

1. The Zondervan Parallel New Testament in Greek and English Bible. (KJV, NIV, Greek Interlinear)​

2. The Devotional Bible by Max Lucado, it's NCV.​

3. The Naves Study Bible​

4. Matthew Henry Commentary to go along with the Classical Commentaries which has around 8-10 different peoples understandings.​

5. There is the BibleGateway.com with it's 20 different translations.​

6. The Wycliffe Bible Commentary.​

7. Then there is the computer, and way to many websites.​

8. The Dead Sea Scrolls, By Michael Wise, Martin Abegg Jr., and Edward Cook​

I go with the scriptures and not the doctrines of some denomination, as I have been accused of doing many times.​

Here is one of the things I have studied, which was written way before 1966. In fact these are things that were believed and taught as far back as 151 AD.​

What did early Christians believe about...?​

(Before 400 AD) ​

Uninspired records of how early Christians worshipped and what doctrine they believed! ​

​

What did early Christians believe about Homosexuality!​

• 151 AD Justin Martyr "[W]e have been taught that to expose newly-born children is the part of wicked men; and this we have been taught lest we should do anyone harm and lest we should sin against God, first, because we see that almost all so exposed (not only the girls, but also the males) are brought up to prostitution. And for this pollution a multitude of females and hermaphrodites, and those who commit unmentionable iniquities, are found in every nation. And you receive the hire of these, and duty and taxes from them, whom you ought to exterminate from your realm. And any one who uses such persons, besides the godless and infamous and impure intercourse, may possibly be having intercourse with his own child, or relative, or brother. And there are some who prostitute even their own children and wives, and some are openly mutilated for the purpose of sodomy; and they refer these mysteries to the mother of the gods" (First Apology 27).
• 181 AD Theophilus of Antioch "Give studious attention to the prophetic writings [the Bible] and they will lead you on a clearer path to escape the eternal punishments and to obtain the eternal good things of God.. [God] will examine everything and will judge justly, granting recompense to each according to merit. To those who seek immortality by the patient exercise of good works, he will give everlasting life, joy, peace, rest, and all good things.. For the unbelievers and for the contemptuous, and for those who do not submit to the truth but assent to iniquity, when they have been involved in adulteries, and fornications, and homosexualities, and avarice, and in lawless idolatries, there will be wrath and indignation, tribulation and anguish; and in the end, such men as these will be detained in everlasting fire" (To Autolycus 1:14).
• 190 AD Clement of Alexandria "All honor to that king of the Scythians, whoever Anacharsis was, who shot with an arrow one of his subjects who imitated among the Scythians the mystery of the mother of the gods . . . condemning him as having become effeminate among the Greeks, and a teacher of the disease of effeminacy to the rest of the Scythians" … [According to Greek myth] Baubo [a female native of Elusis] having received [the goddess] Demeter hospitably, reached to her a refreshing draught; and on her refusing it, not having any inclination to drink (for she was very sad), and Baubo having become annoyed, thinking herself slighted, uncovered her shame, and exhibited her nudity to the goddess. Demeter is delighted with the sight--pleased, I repeat, at the spectacle. These are the secret mysteries of the Athenians; these Orpheus records" … "It is not, then, without reason that the poets call him [Hercules] a cruel wretch and a nefarious scoundrel. It were tedious to recount his adulteries of all sorts, and debauching of boys. For your gods did not even abstain from boys, one having loved Hylas, another Hyacinthus, another Pelops, another Chrysippus, another Ganymede. Let such gods as these be worshipped by your wives, and let them pray that their husbands be such as these--so temperate; that, emulating them in the same practices, they may be like the gods. Such gods let your boys be trained to worship, that they may grow up to be men with the accursed likeness of fornication on them received from the gods" (Exhortation to the Greeks 2).
• http://www.bible.ca/H-homosexuality.htm

Homosexuality may be a word that has not been around that long, but the act of homosexuality has. It also has been taught as a sin for as far back as I have found so far, which is around 100 AD.
​

We believe history books that are written about people like Alexander the Great, and other people from way back in history. Even tho these things weren't written till 400 hundred or more years after their deaths, but we refuse to believe things that were written 50 to 100 yrs., after Christs death. ​

Anyhow, I don't just read and believe things written and agreed on by the top denominations, or that are written from 1966 to the present time. Assuming that all people who don't agree with you, or that live in certain areas, are fundamentalist and conservative, don't know how or just don't use the brain God gave them to find the truth is, well.......................................... dare I say judgemental and wrong.​

If I was a liar and a chronic one at that, would you as my brother of sister in Christ come to me as the Bible says to?​

Would you lift me up in your prayers?​

Would you show me how the Bible says that it is a sin and what that sin does?​

If I was like this before I ask the Lord to save me, and in fact said that it wasn't a sin and needed no forgiveness would I really be saved?​

If someone ask others who profess to be Christians if I can be saved while refusing to admit this sin, are they being judgemental?​

Would I then be able to call anyone who did the above a hater and bigot for doing them?​

Would I be able to say that they aren't showing the love of Christ because of their actions?​

And if I took the time I could dig up something about the histories acceptance of racism by Christians.

Would that historic acceptance make racism acceptable now?




When you denounce an entire minority whether it be homosexuals or blacks or Jews or the handicapped…no matter how you justify it you would be engaging in.

Is advocating and justifying discrimination against blacks an act of hate? Yes it is.
Would citing the bible make discrimination against blacks acceptable? No.
Would you be a bigot for doing this? Yes you would.


Is advocating and justifying discrimination against Jews an act of hate? Yes it is.
Would citing the bible make discrimination against Jews acceptable? No.
Would you be a bigot for doing this? Yes you would.


Is advocating and justifying discrimination against Hispanics an act of hate? Yes it is.
Would citing the bible make discrimination against Hispanics acceptable? No.
Would you be a bigot for doing this? Yes you would.


Is advocating and justifying discrimination against the handicapped an act of hate? Yes it is.
Would citing the bible make discrimination against the handicapped acceptable? No.
Would you be a bigot for doing this? Yes you would.


Is advocating and justifying discrimination against Muslims an act of hate? Yes it is.
Would citing the bible make discrimination against Muslims acceptable? No.
Would you be a bigot for doing this? Yes you would.


Is advocating and justifying discrimination against homosexuals an act of hate? Yes it is.
Would citing the bible make discrimination against homosexuals acceptable? No.
Would you be a bigot for doing this? Yes you would.

 

[savedandhappy1]

Several people quote science studies that say they have proved that a person is born homosexual. Yet, last year was supposed to be worse than the year before, according to science, with deadly hurricaines. We put science above or use it as proof that the Bible means this or that. Or can't mean this or that.

If I remember correctly there weren't any hurricaines that came on shore or if they did there wasn't anything near the devastation like 2005. Yet, we are supposed to treat the findings from science as........... well as gospel, all knowing and all truth. Can't/won't do that, if it doesn't agree with the scriptures.