• 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.

Where in the NEW TESTAMENT does it say being gay is a sin?

Fenny the Fox

Well-Known Member
Apr 21, 2009
4,147
315
Rock Hill, SC
Visit site
✟38,619.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
you missed the post explaining that kind of love is not Godly love at all .. if one loved the guy one would flee from him so as not to aid his demise into deception and end him in hell fire to appease ones own will in rebellion to God
sons love fathers ,fathers love sons .. your trying to taint the waters in a most defiled manner .
but God know the Hearts of two men .. he knows the real reason they remain together ..he is not fooled .

You ignore that there are, even within the Scritures, more than one kind of "love". There is the love of family, the love of God (both our love of Him, and His love for us), and there is romantic love (with or without sex, mind). To conflate the love of two men, two women, a man and woman with that of children and parent is categorically wrong. As is to conflate it with the the love of God.

One can love another while in error, as is often the case, sadly. But it is love none-the-less. Whether we call someone selfish for that or not, or whether we question the end result of that relationship, that does not change the initial motive of love if it is there.
 
Upvote 0

Alithis

Disciple of Jesus .
Nov 11, 2010
15,750
2,180
Mobile
✟109,492.00
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You ignore that there are, even within the Scritures, more than one kind of "love". There is the love of family, the love of God (both our love of Him, and His love for us), and there is romantic love (with or without sex, mind). To conflate the love of two men, two women, a man and woman with that of children and parent is categorically wrong. As is to conflate it with the the love of God.

One can love another while in error, as is often the case, sadly. But it is love none-the-less. Whether we call someone selfish for that or not, or whether we question the end result of that relationship, that does not change the initial motive of love if it is there.

Your confusing love with carnal emotion
 
Upvote 0

seeingeyes

Newbie
Nov 29, 2011
8,944
809
Backwoods, Ohio
✟35,360.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I bet even the poster who originally said it will see that isn't a very good way of putting it.

Well, I might agree, but looking at his further posts, I'm going to have to stand my ground on this one.

It's just a contrast; Holy reasons, vs reasons pertaining to self; i.e., self-ish. Language doesn't always work well like that, let's not nit-pick a word to death, ok?
I wouldn't want to marry anyone who was getting married for entirely selfless reasons...
 
Upvote 0

Fenny the Fox

Well-Known Member
Apr 21, 2009
4,147
315
Rock Hill, SC
Visit site
✟38,619.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Your confusing love with carnal emotion

No. I am pointing out that love is not cut and dry, one type only. "Love", scripturally speaking, is divided. And to conflate one with another is a categorical error.

Love (between lovers, not towards God or family) does not negate carnal emotion, no. But it is also wrong to directly call the two one and the same.

What proof do you have love cannot exist between two men/two women, as it does between a man and woman? (Note! I did not mention sex between those two same sex people at all, as I already clearly pointed out that is sin, according to scripture, and I don't feel it needs to be repeated ad nauseum.)
 
Upvote 0

stevenfrancis

Disciple
Dec 28, 2012
956
246
68
United States
Visit site
✟56,900.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
At a minimum, ALL sexual activity outside of the marriage between a man and a woman is sin. So all homosexual sex, even in not spelled out, is at least "fornication". It is not the unitive and reproductive union ordained by God. The deeply deceptive and disingenuous part of the homosexual/gay lobby is that homosexual sex acts should somehow be distinct from all other sexual immorality because there is possibly a natural inclination in some percentage of the population. This may fly in secular "politics". There is no such distinction to God. So even if every political body in the world were to sanction homosexual sex, (and in fact, most of them already have), it can not be made right spiritually. If every country on earth called the monogamous pairing of same sex couples "marriage", it still wouldn't be the union described by God. The other thing that gets overlooked is that all of this applies to HETERO sexual persons as well. There are far more heterosexual persons per capita messing around with debauchery and fornication than same sex attracted persons. If nothing else because of the sheer number of heterosexual persons vs. homosexual persons. NOBODY gets a pass. Sexual immorality is a sin no matter who practices it, or with whom they practice it. This is why the Saints, the Fathers, and such say that it is better to pair up in man/woman marriages, or to be celibate/continent. So we are not putting our very salvation at risk.

So Christ Himself mentions this in the Gospel according to Matthew:

Matt 15:19 It is from the heart that his wicked designs come, his sins of murder, adultery, fornication, theft, perjury and blasphemy. 20 It is these make a man unclean; he is not made unclean by eating without washing his hands.

St. Paul refers to fornication and debauchery as sin here:

1 Cor 6:18 Keep clear, then, of debauchery. Any other sin a man commits, leaves the body untouched, but the fornicator is committing a crime against his own body.[5] 19 Surely you know that your bodies are the shrines of the Holy Spirit, who dwells in you. And he is God’s gift to you, so that you are no longer your own masters. 20 A great price was paid to ransom you; glorify God by making your bodies the shrines of his presence.

Romans 13:12 The night is far on its course; day draws near. Let us abandon the ways of darkness, and put on the armour of light. 13 Let us pass our time honourably, as by the light of day, not in revelling and drunkenness, not in lust and wantonness, not in quarrels and rivalries. 14 Rather, arm yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ; spend no more thought on nature and nature’s appetites.

1 Cor 5:1 Why, there are reports of incontinence among you, and such incontinence as is not practised even among the heathen; a man taking to himself his father’s wife. 2 And you, it seems, have been contumacious over it, instead of deploring it, and expelling the man who has been guilty of such a deed from your company.

1 Cor 6: 9 Yet you know well enough that wrong-doers will not inherit God’s kingdom. Make no mistake about it; it is not the debauched, the idolaters, the adulterous, 10 it is not the effeminate, the sinners against nature, the dishonest, the misers, the drunkards, the bitter of speech, the extortioners that will inherit the kingdom of God.

1 Cor 10:5 And for all that, God was ill pleased with most of them; see how they were laid low in the wilderness. 6 It is we that were foreshadowed in these events. We were not to set our hearts, as some of them set their hearts, on forbidden things. 7 You were not to turn idolatrous, as some of them did; so we read, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to take their pleasure.[3] 8 We were not to commit fornication, as some of them committed fornication, when twenty-three thousand of them were killed in one day.[4] 9 We were not to try the patience of Christ, as some of them tried it, the men who were slain by the serpents;[5] 10 nor were you to complain, as some of them complained, till the destroying angel slew them.[6] 11 When all this happened to them, it was a symbol; the record of it was written as a warning to us, in whom history has reached its fulfilment; 12 and it means that he who thinks he stands firmly should beware of a fall.[7] 13 I pray that no temptation may come upon you that is beyond man’s strength.[8] Not that God will play you false; he will not allow you to be tempted beyond your powers. With the temptation itself, he will ordain the issue of it, and enable you to hold your own.

Gal 5:18 It is by letting the spirit lead you that you free yourselves from the yoke of the law. 19 It is easy to see what effects proceed from corrupt nature; they are such things as adultery, impurity, incontinence, luxury, 20 idolatry, witchcraft, feuds, quarrels, jealousies, outbursts of anger, rivalries, dissensions, factions, 21 spite, murder, drunkenness, and debauchery. I warn you, as I have warned you before, that those who live in such a way will not inherit God’s kingdom.

Ephes 5: 3 As for debauchery, and impurity of every kind, and covetousness, there must be no whisper of it among you; it would ill become saints; 4 no indecent behaviour, no ribaldry or smartness in talk; that is not your business, your business is to give thanks to God. 5 This you must know well enough, that nobody can claim a share in Christ’s kingdom, God’s kingdom, if he is debauched, or impure, or has that love of money which makes a man an idolater.

Coll 3:5 You must deaden, then, those passions in you which belong to earth, fornication and impurity, lust and evil desire, and that love of money which is an idolatry. 6 These are what bring down God’s vengeance on the unbelievers,

1 Thes 4:3 What God asks of you is that you should sanctify yourselves, and keep clear of fornication. 4 Each of you must learn to control his own body, as something holy and held in honour,[1] 5 not yielding to the promptings of passion, as the heathen do in their ignorance of God. 6 None of you is to be exorbitant, and take advantage of his brother, in his business dealings. For all such wrong-doing God exacts punishment; we have told you so already, in solemn warning.

Hebr 13:4 Marriage, in every way, must be held in honour, and the marriage-bed kept free from stain; over fornication and adultery, God will call us to account.

Christ again, in His revelation to St. John:

Rev 21:7 Who wins the victory? He shall have his share in this; I will be his God, and he shall be my son. 8 But not the cowards, not those who refuse belief, not those whose lives are abominable; not the murderers, the fornicators, the sorcerers, the idolaters, not those who are false in any of their dealings. Their lot awaits them in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, and it is the second death.

-----------------------
Various forms of "fornication"
Enhanced Strong's Lexicon:

translates as "fornication" 26 times. 1 illicit sexual intercourse. 1a adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, intercourse with animals etc. 1b sexual intercourse with close relatives; Lev. 18. 1c sexual intercourse with a divorced man or woman; Mk. 10:11,12. 2 metaph. the worship of idols. 2a of the defilement of idolatry, as incurred by eating the sacrifices offered to idols.

I hope this all helps somewhat. That's honestly my intent.

May God bless
 
Upvote 0
T

theophilus777

Guest
What proof do you have love cannot exist between two men/two women, as it does between a man and woman? (Note! I did not mention sex between those two same sex people at all, as I already clearly pointed out that is sin, according to scripture, and I don't feel it needs to be repeated ad nauseum.)

I'll take up the man's point here. if you would actually read his statement, I think you'll find you cannot disagree with the very limited scope he puts forward. But those little words "as it does" are not defined, and how they are defined could make this go either way. Clearly, at some point there are going to be differences.
 
Upvote 0

Alithis

Disciple of Jesus .
Nov 11, 2010
15,750
2,180
Mobile
✟109,492.00
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
No. I am pointing out that love is not cut and dry, one type only. "Love", scripturally speaking, is divided. And to conflate one with another is a categorical error.

Love (between lovers, not towards God or family) does not negate carnal emotion, no. But it is also wrong to directly call the two one and the same.

What proof do you have love cannot exist between two men/two women, as it does between a man and woman? (Note! I did not mention sex between those two same sex people at all, as I already clearly pointed out that is sin, according to scripture, and I don't feel it needs to be repeated ad nauseum.)

Are just trying to justify cohabitation under the premise of carnal love?
It won't work.its God you will have to convince,not me.
Same sex marriage is born of the demonic through and through.it is the epitaph of rebellion against God.
 
Upvote 0

Fenny the Fox

Well-Known Member
Apr 21, 2009
4,147
315
Rock Hill, SC
Visit site
✟38,619.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
I'll take up the man's point here. if you would actually read his statement, I think you'll find you cannot disagree with the very limited scope he puts forward.

Well sure, since his limited scope is purely "sex/lust/carnal emotion are equal to love", essentially. At least in the case of homosexuals. Which is why I am debating it in the first place. I think he is wrong and am asking for evidence otherwise. Since I feel the premise that love cannot exist between two men, that that is only lust and selfish vice, is flawed.

But those little words "as it does" are not defined, and how they are defined could make this go either way. Clearly, at some point there are going to be differences.

"As it does", I feel, is quite clear - being in the same way and form. Love exists in one case as it does/in the same way as the other case. Outward expression is different maybe. Relationship dynamics, maybe.

but is there a difference in the base emotion present, the basic foundation of what love for another is? I honestly don't think there is.
 
Upvote 0

Fenny the Fox

Well-Known Member
Apr 21, 2009
4,147
315
Rock Hill, SC
Visit site
✟38,619.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Are just trying to justify cohabitation under the premise of carnal love?
It won't work.its God you will have to convince,not me.
Same sex marriage is born of the demonic through and through.it is the epitaph of rebellion against God.

If two people are not having sex while together, there is no sin in that. Period.

[One could argue the sin in thought, but that could be present no matter what one does - be they single and celibate, together but chaste, or married to a woman. So that is moot.]

I am justifying nothing, since there is nothing to justify in my question. I am asking for actual evidence, scriptural or otherwise, that two men could not love each other as a man and woman do.

And I am not being euphemistic, I am not talking about sex in any way shape or form, I am talking ONLY about the emotion of love.
 
Upvote 0

Alithis

Disciple of Jesus .
Nov 11, 2010
15,750
2,180
Mobile
✟109,492.00
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Well sure, since his limited scope is purely "sex/lust/carnality emotion are equal to love", essentially. At least in the case of homosexuals. Which is why I am debating it in the first place. I think he is wrong and am asking for evidence otherwise. Since I feel the premise that love cannot exist between two men, that that is only lust and selfish vice, is flawed.



"As it does", I feel, is quite clear - being in the same way and form. Love exists in one case as it does/in the same way as the other case. Outward expression is different maybe. Relationship dynamics, maybe.

but is there a difference in the base emotion present, the basic foundation of what love for another is? I honestly don't think there is.

Ummm no
Sex lust carnality are Not love.
They are the world's warped version of love.
Love is an action that results in emotions being activated.the lord Jesus did not die on the cross because of warn furry feelings..he did what he knew to be necessary to achieve the greatest possible good for all others.
He displayed what love is.

To say one loves another and then justify behaviour that is in rebellion to God-who is love- is a state of self deception.if you love some one with Godly love you will lay down your life for their greater good.not attempt to justify sin in them
 
Upvote 0

Fenny the Fox

Well-Known Member
Apr 21, 2009
4,147
315
Rock Hill, SC
Visit site
✟38,619.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Ummm no
Sex lust cardinality are Not love.
They are the world's warped version of love.
Love is an action that results in emotions being activated.the lord Jesus did not die on the cross because of warn furry feelings..he did what he knew to be necessary to achieve the greatest possible good for all others.
He displayed what love is.

And once again you refuse to acknowledge that even scripture does not confine 'love' to a single use or type. The love of God for us is not the same as that of us for another romantically - be that a husband and wife or not. (I agree that we should have that same love for another as God us, but that is a different issue altogether.)
 
Upvote 0

Sammy-San

Newbie
May 23, 2013
9,020
848
✟119,589.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Is being gay a sin in the New Testament? I seem to recall a few verses in the gospels but can't remember and I don't have time to read the whole thing. And why should it be any different than any other sin? Are we going to ban gluttony? Anger? Jealousy? I'm sick o so called Christians attacking gays.
My nephew is gay and I love him dearly. I am having a very hard time withy faith lately and am questioning everything I know about Christianity.
I am angry at God because of all the recent loss I have suffered. I have been forsaken to say the least. John 3:16 says that I only have to believe in Jesus and I will have eternal life. Yes I believe. But I am done with the hypocrisy that surrounds me at church.
Please respond. I cannot be the only Christian supporting gays.

Romans 1:26 says that homosexuality is sinful.
 
Upvote 0

KrAZeD

Newbie
Apr 13, 2014
391
14
✟23,102.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Good embraces/acts of love and intimacy
Luke 16:22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;


John 21:20 Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth

Both verses are showing illustrations of an intimate act, getting close and personal with another without any immoral or sinful results/actions.

John 13:34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

One would have a huge problem explaining the way Jesus Loves us and his disciples, is any way different than how a person loves their spouse.

The only difference is that a married couple engages in sex, while Jesus did not, nor his disciples. The romantic aspects of "love" are not applied or conceived of.

2 persons of the same sex can reproduce this type of a platonic relationship, and not sin at all. However if one gets tempted or decides to expand upon it, that is the sin, that is the problem, not the fact of loving each other. Not everyone can do this, however it is plausible.


Bad embraces/acts of love and intimacy

Proverbs 5:20 And why wilt thou, my son, be ravished with a strange woman, and embrace the bosom of a stranger?

Again showing the same aspect of intimacy but with immoral/sinful intentions.
 
Upvote 0

Alithis

Disciple of Jesus .
Nov 11, 2010
15,750
2,180
Mobile
✟109,492.00
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Good embraces/acts of love and intimacy
Luke 16:22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;


John 21:20 Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth

Both verses are showing illustrations of an intimate act, getting close and personal with another without any immoral or sinful results/actions.

John 13:34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

One would have a huge problem explaining the way Jesus Loves us and his disciples, is any way different than how a person loves their spouse.

The only difference is that a married couple engages in sex, while Jesus did not, nor his disciples. The romantic aspects of "love" are not applied or conceived of.

2 persons of the same sex can reproduce this type of a platonic relationship, and not sin at all. However if one gets tempted or decides to expand upon it, that is the sin, that is the problem, not the fact of loving each other. Not everyone can do this, however it is plausible.


Bad embraces/acts of love and intimacy

Proverbs 5:20 And why wilt thou, my son, be ravished with a strange woman, and embrace the bosom of a stranger?

Again showing the same aspect of intimacy but with immoral/sinful intentions.

I can see that
 
Upvote 0

tremble

^.^/
Feb 15, 2014
685
216
✟24,427.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
krazed said:
2 persons of the same sex can reproduce this type of a platonic relationship, and not sin at all. However if one gets tempted or decides to expand upon it, that is the sin, that is the problem, not the fact of loving each other. Not everyone can do this, however it is plausible

Ok, so how to convince homosexuals that it's the sex the physical aspects of their relationships which is the problem, and how to deal with those who are already in a relationship?
 
Upvote 0

Alithis

Disciple of Jesus .
Nov 11, 2010
15,750
2,180
Mobile
✟109,492.00
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Ok, so how to convince homosexuals that it's the sex the physical aspects of their relationships which is the problem, and how to deal with those who are already in a relationship?

The problem with this question is it accepts there is such a thing as a homosexual .a 3rd species.
When you stand two men side by side .one claims to be gay the other not.
What is the only definable difference between them?

Their behavior .the acts they do.
 
Upvote 0
T

theophilus777

Guest
Ok, so how to convince homosexuals that it's the sex the physical aspects of their relationships which is the problem, and how to deal with those who are already in a relationship?

That is the $64,000 question. Whether they are in a relationship or not. This applies to heterosexual people too. Also to marital fidelity.

The preaching of chastity has never been popular or easy. And whether we agree with certain teaching on the (ever)Virgin Mary or not, it certainly provides a role model in stark contrast to the ways of the world.
 
Upvote 0

Fenny the Fox

Well-Known Member
Apr 21, 2009
4,147
315
Rock Hill, SC
Visit site
✟38,619.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
The problem with this question is it accepts there is such a thing as a homosexual

for one...there is only one species in question here. I don't where you gt this "3rd species" thing. I am kinda curious.

That aside.

Even if we assume it is a disordered desire, a disordered state, [which I haven't seen anyone actually claim otherwise, at least in this thread, or have I missed it?] to have attractions for the same sex, that wouldn't change the fact it happens. What would you rather call those people "heterosexual but not interested in the opposite sex"?

Action has NOTHING to do with the word homosexual - the word only refers to the attraction present.
 
Upvote 0