Which is more damaging?

[LittleNipper]

How?

Both are self-centered.

 

[LittleNipper]

Hey, did you know that sexual immorality is MORE than just homosexuality? It's an entire gambit of activities in the Bible. Homosexuality would be a very small portion of it.

So very true.

 

[Chazemataz]

Friends,
One own view is either in line or not with God's.
Gen 2, Gen 19, Lev 18 & 20, Matt 19, Mark 7, 1 Cor 5, 6, 7, 1 Tim 1, Romans 1, 2 Peter 2, Jude 1 etc.
God'd view is man and woman in uion or celibacy with same sex relations error.

Have you ever read 1 Samuel?

"...the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul" - 1 Sam. 18:2

"And Jonathan made a covenant with David because he loved him as himself. Jonathan took off the robe he was wearing and gave it to David, along with his tunic, and even his sword, his bow and his belt." -1 Sam. 18:3-4

"After the boy had gone, David got up from the south side of the stone and bowed down before Jonathan three times, with is face to the ground. Then they kissed each other and wept together - but David wept the most." -1 Sam. 20:41

and finally-
2 Samuel 1:26
"I grieve for you, Jonathan my brother; you were very dear to me. Your love for me was wonderful, more wonderful than that of women."

How do you feel about those bible verses? That's King David, you know, the one who fell Goliath. They seem to shed a whole different biblical perspective on same-sex relationships. And don't be dumb and say that they were just friends.

 

[LittleNipper]

Have you ever read 1 Samuel?

"...the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul" - 1 Sam. 18:2

"And Jonathan made a covenant with David because he loved him as himself. Jonathan took off the robe he was wearing and gave it to David, along with his tunic, and even his sword, his bow and his belt." -1 Sam. 18:3-4

"After the boy had gone, David got up from the south side of the stone and bowed down before Jonathan three times, with is face to the ground. Then they kissed each other and wept together - but David wept the most." -1 Sam. 20:41

and finally-
2 Samuel 1:26
"I grieve for you, Jonathan my brother; you were very dear to me. Your love for me was wonderful, more wonderful than that of women."

How do you feel about those bible verses? That's King David, you know, the one who fell Goliath. They seem to shed a whole different biblical perspective on same-sex relationships. And don't be dumb and say that they were just friends.

Well, the fact is---that it is recorded that they kissed and that David bowed down to his very close friend Jonathan three times. And also that David called Jonathan his brother and grieved for him at his passing.

It also is recorded that David felt something so special for Jonathan that his feelings surpassed those David had towards women (at least up to that time).

BUT with all that detail, it doesn't say that David and Jonathan laid together in anyway. In fact, I feel that what is presented is a love story between two men that is better than sex.

This is where homosexuality falls on its face. They (homosexuals) may profess love; but need, must have, cannot live without ---------------- SEX mixed in. The focus of that relationship is sex. The focus of a man and wife union can at the very least become the children they have together.

 

[Supernaut]

BUT with all that detail, it doesn't say that David and Jonathan laid together in anyway. In fact, I feel that what is presented is a love story between two men that is better than sex.

So then, they are the model homosexual relationship that all GLBT should look up to? Also, what do you think happened when Johnathan disrobed in front of David? Obviously, there was a sexual relationship their as Johnathan symbolically gave up to David his manhood by giving his sword.

This is where homosexuality falls on its face. They (homosexuals) may profess love; but need, must have, cannot live without ---------------- SEX mixed in. The focus of that relationship is sex. The focus of a man and wife union can at the very least become the children they have together.

How is it that you have such intimate knowledge of their innermost desires? Why wouldn't they have sex? Sex is not all about procreation.

What makes you think that the focus of a homosexual relationship is sex? Where does your knowledge on the intimate workings of the homosexual relationship come from?

 

[LittleNipper]

So then, they are the model homosexual relationship that all GLBT should look up to? Also, what do you think happened when Johnathan disrobed in front of David? Obviously, there was a sexual relationship their as Johnathan symbolically gave up to David his manhood by giving his sword.



How is it that you have such intimate knowledge of their innermost desires? Why wouldn't they have sex? Sex is not all about procreation.

What makes you think that the focus of a homosexual relationship is sex? Where does your knowledge on the intimate workings of the homosexual relationship come from?

Remember, it is the SEX in homosexuality that is evil. Nothing wrong with a loving platonic friendship/relationship, nor being a ballet dancer.

Homosexual sex hasn't anything to do with making babies, and that is its root problem. IT IS ALL ABOUT PLEASURE.

 

[Supernaut]

Remember, it is the SEX in homosexuality that is evil. Nothing wrong with a loving platonic friendship/relationship, nor being a ballet dancer.

The SEX is wrong when it is outside of a monogamous relationship. Sex between two commited gays is not evil or sinful. Not much into ballet..but I agree with you it isn't evil.

The NT has no issues with sex for pleasure within the context of monogamy whatsoever.

 

[FaithLikeARock]

Neither.

Lack of love, patience and caring of every human being will destroy your soul faster than either.

 

[b&wpac4]

Neither.

Lack of love, patience and caring of every human being will destroy your soul faster than either.

That would be charity...

 

[FaithLikeARock]

Remember, it is the SEX in homosexuality that is evil. Nothing wrong with a loving platonic friendship/relationship, nor being a ballet dancer.

Homosexual sex hasn't anything to do with making babies, and that is its root problem. IT IS ALL ABOUT PLEASURE.

Go read Song of Songs Nipper.

It's a book all about how sex WASN'T created just for baby making. It's a book about how sex was made for pleasure, and to bring two people who love each other together as one person.

Sex isn't just for babies. If it was, God wouldn't make people infertile. Really, sex for babies is just sort of an after effect. A nice convenient way for babies to pop up. What is was created for was unifying a couple.

 

[LittleNipper]

The SEX is wrong when it is outside of a monogamous relationship. Sex between two commited gays is not evil or sinful. Not much into ballet..but I agree with you it isn't evil.

The NT has no issues with sex for pleasure within the context of monogamy whatsoever.

But that sex should be considered in the light that it may likely produce offspring. And monagamous meaning a husband and wife relationship. Homosexuality fits neither criteria. It certainly does not fit a biblical model. Three strikes --------------- OUT!

 

[LittleNipper]

Go read Song of Songs Nipper.

It's a book all about how sex WASN'T created just for baby making. It's a book about how sex was made for pleasure, and to bring two people who love each other together as one person.

Sex isn't just for babies. If it was, God wouldn't make people infertile. Really, sex for babies is just sort of an after effect. A nice convenient way for babies to pop up. What is was created for was unifying a couple.

There is on sex there.

 

[The Nihilist]

Both are self-centered.

Pfff, so is eating candy, but I don't think you're going to say that eating candy leads you to be uncharitable.

 

[FaithLikeARock]

That would be charity...

And about sexual immorality. When you get right down to it, everything you could do wrong in the world goes right back to how much you love others, how much you respect yourself, and how much patience you have for the world.

 

[Supernaut]

But that sex should be considered in the light that it may likely produce offspring. And monagamous meaning a husband and wife relationship. Homosexuality fits neither criteria. It certainly does not fit a biblical model. Three strikes --------------- OUT!

At least you prove to be a poor Umpire!! Sex is not all about procreation. Monogamous does not only mean husband/wife. Homosexuals are just as capable of monogamy and child rearing as any hetero. When did Jesus, Paul, Peter, Jude, Timothy, John or anyone else in the NT say that a monogamous gay couple aren't adequate or suitable? When did they ever condemn a monogamous gay couple in any capacity?

Shall I count your strikes Nip?

 

[Supernaut]

There is on sex there.

I would suggest reading it again then.

 

[Smidlee]

I wonder which is more damaging? lack of charity or walking out in front of a speeding 18 wheeler?
On the serious note in Galatians 5:22 the whole list given is the fruit (not fruits) of the Spirit.

P.S also note the NT church that happen to have problems with promoting sexual immorality also have problems with charity as well.

 

[Inquisition]

My partner had his bike stolen over the weekend. The security garage door was broken (left open), and when we went to ride bikes, his was gone.

Now, most people would think, "Stealing is wrong because you are taking the property of someone else, and it doesn't belong to you."

But it was deeper than that. He really likes to ride his bike, and rides it to work every day, and now he can't. He felt angry at the people of Toronto in general, feeling like it is a dishonest and distrust city of people. Every bike we passed he would look at to see if it was his. He also felt kind of violate, like, someone who is touching your stuff, someone who has broken into your house, or taken away your feeling of security.

Most people would only think about the person stealing the bike. They rarely think about the person that is the victim of the incident.

I was mugged in 2001, had my head split open for $30 and an old 80s leather coat. I still return, occasional, to the fear of that night, and I'm sure the perp simply thinks of it as stealing my stuff. He took far more than that.

Want to know which is worse?
Talk about how you would feel if you really needed help, and no one would help you, or how you would feel if someone raped you, and how long that short action would stay with you, and how it would manifest itself.

Your story is a perfect example of lack of charity at work. Please do not feel like I am singling you out or that I am attacking you in any way, but I would like to use your story to illustrate lack of Charity.

You mentioned the bike being stolen and stealing in itself is an act fraught with lack of charity, but so also is the reaction you describe. I know well how easy it is to fall into suspicion for and of your fellow man when you are violated in such a fashion, but to cast suspicion onto everyone is also a lack of charity and an example we can all relate to.

IMO, sexual immorality is a sin of the flesh. A sin with just as much penalty on it as any other, but a sin of the flesh none the less. Lack of Charity, however, is a sin of the soul and withers and destroys both heart and soul to where a person can feel justified in committing a whole litany of sins.

 

[FaithLikeARock]

I would suggest reading it again then.

Clarify for me Reverend. Did he really just say that Song of Songs didn't have sex in it?

Then why did my pastor not allow me to join the study group until I was 16. D:

 

[Inquisition]

Sexual immorality leads to lack of charity.

I'm going to have to disagree. They can walk hand in hand - but I do not believe that a sin of the flesh can cause a sin of the spirit. if anything, I'm going to say that it's the other way around.