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.
I understand the need to be pationate about something which you believe in, but evidently sometimes that desire leaves us open to deceit from satan, and it therefore takes others to show us we are wrong because our hearts are hardened to God,
Repeating the 'fact' that it is a sin doesn't explain why it is a sin.
Doesn't hold water unless all relationships which cannot result in children are sinful.
See the first point.
No.So my saying God's word condemns it does not explain why it is a sin??
.Is it not enough that God Himself calls it an abomination
They don't address the question being asked.Another verse i should have posted previous is more than clear on how God views homosexuality
It has everything to do with it if you claim the possiblity of children as reason. It's called consistancy and following an argument to it's conclusion.The fact that God created Adam and Eve, male and female, joining them in marriage and telling them to "go forth and multiply" holds water. The fact that heterosexual, married couples can't have children has nothing to do with it!
Again, this has nothing to do with the question the OP asks.God has never sanctioned unnatural homosexual 'couple' relationships, let alone same sex 'marriage' which we in Canada who fear God must endure!
Again, this does not address the question being asked.It seems apparent to me that you are unwilling to take God at His word and the clear teaching, both in the Old and New Testaments that homosexuality is, without a doubt, sinful behaviour and a sinful lifestyle. The fact that it is mentioned as sinful in both Testaments proves that it is not a cultural thing or specific only for Old Testament times. It has been sinful in God's eyes throughout the course of human history - His word proving this to be the case!
So if Paul meant homosexual (or sodomite) as you are implying the word arsenokoitai translates as why didnt he use the word he meant instead of an obscure word that no one else was using to mean homosexual when there were well known words in Greek that clearly meant homosexual?So my saying God's word condemns it does not explain why it is a sin?? Is it not enough that God Himself calls it an abomination. Another verse i should have posted previous is more than clear on how God views homosexuality -
1 Corinthians 6:9-11 (KJV) Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
The Apostle Paul calls those who "abuse themselves with mankind" ( arsenokoitai. Paederastae, or Sodomites. Those who indulged in a vice that was common among all the heathen.) (Barnes) unrighteous who will NOT inherit the Kingdom of God. It is clear from these verses that why it is sin is because God views it as such - and His word uses such words as "against nature", "unnatural", "an abomination" to describe sodomites.
Well if one wants to the fact that homosexual couples cannot reproduce as an excuse for discrimination then it does something to do with it.The fact that God created Adam and Eve, male and female, joining them in marriage and telling them to "go forth and multiply" holds water. The fact that heterosexual, married couples can't have children has nothing to do with it! God has never sanctioned unnatural homosexual 'couple' relationships, let alone same sex 'marriage' which we in Canada who fear God must endure!
well there is a lot of doubt. The new testament suffers from prominent translation issues. In the old testament the only place the bible is actually clear on the subject is right next to verses making slavery and the murder of ones own child moral acts.It seems apparent to me that you are unwilling to take God at His word and the clear teaching, both in the Old and New Testaments that homosexuality is, without a doubt, sinful behaviour and a sinful lifestyle.
It also says that heating shellfish is wrongThe Bible says that fornication is wrong and it says that homosexuality is wrong.
I don't see how you can ok one and reject the other. That's called Cafeteria Christianity and is, in my opinion, very, very, very unhealthy.
All of that was under the Old Testament law. If you read Romans, not only does it talk about homosexuality being a sin (I know you dispute this) but it also has an entire chapter devoted to Christian liberties and no longer needing to adhere to the law of Moses.It also says that heating shellfish is wrong
It says that wearing gold jewelry is wrong.
and that wearing clothing made of mixed fabrics is wrong,
and that shaving is wrong.
So you do any of these things?
Are you not then also engaging in Cafeteria Christianity?
It also says that heating shellfish is wrong
It says that wearing gold jewelry is wrong.
and that wearing clothing made of mixed fabrics is wrong,
and that shaving is wrong.
So you do any of these things?
Are you not then also engaging in “Cafeteria Christianity”?
Christians no longer need adhere to the ten commandments?All of that was under the Old Testament law. If you read Romans, not only does it talk about homosexuality being a sin (I know you dispute this) but it also has an entire chapter devoted to Christian liberties and no longer needing to adhere to the law of Moses.
I've lost track of how you've arrived at the conclusion that if one rejects one then one must reject the other - perhaps you could clarify.Though I personally reject both fornication and homosexuality, here I'm not saying anything is wrong. I'm just saying that I can't see how it's possible to reject one and keep the other.
We don't offer burnt sacrifices and we don't get smote for picking up sticks on the (in my opinion still holy) Sabbath because that's Torah and such law's have been "fulfilled". Indeed, Romans has it spelled out shortly but simply. Somewhere in Hebrews 13 it says against adultery.
These are both AD. Reject one and there's no sense in keeping the other.
And FYI:
I don't have any jewelry and I don't like jewelry on other people. Turns me off.
I don't heat/eat shellfish, I don't believe I have any mixed fabric clothing (though I'll have to check), and I've never shaved. It doesn't matter, though.
I'm no Jew, btw.
Christians no longer need adhere to the ten commandments?
News to me!
Particularly since Jesus said otherwise on several occasions:
Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one title will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 5:17-19
It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid." Luke 16:17
Has not Moses given you the law? Yet not one of you keeps the law. John 7:19
And BTW the prohibition on wearing gold is a new testament rule
The ten commandmants don't talk about eating shellfish, wearing clothing of mixed fabrics, or shaving. Clearly you know that. You are now just arguing for the sake of arguing, to distract from the point of the discussion.
THAT is the law being referred to, not the ten commandmants. In every example given in the New Testament about not being required to follow the law - which, if it's "news" to you, you should read your NT more - refers to those laws, not to the ten commandmants. But I strongly suspect that you know this too.
There seem to be two conversations that are worth of FAQ status they crop up so often:
Conversation 1
Conservative: Homosexuality is wrong - it says so in Leviticus
Liberal: Levitcus also says wearing mixed fibres is wrong - are you wearing a polycotton shirt?
Conservative: We aren't under the law anymore - it doesn't apply, why did you bring it up?
Conversation 2
Conservative: homosexuality is wrong because it's unnatural
Liberal: no it's not - it occurs frequently in nature
Conservative: lots of things are natural, that doesn't make them ok
In both cases the conservative has forgotten that it was him who brought up the point and it is his point that is being refuted. Do people have very short memories or something?
I am really not surprised that you ignored the points I madeNo, the main difference between our viewpoints has nothing to do with whether we hold to the levitical law. It has to do with whether or not we believe that the NEW TESTAMENT states homosexuality is a sin. I believe that it very clearly does. You do not.
My basis for this discussion never had anything to do with Old Testament law. My responses to the questions you raised about OT law were simply that - responses to your comments. Not arguments in support of my view on homosexual behavior.
Homosexuality is NOT a sin. I will explain later.There are numerious threads in the Ethics & Morality forum, but I wanted to open a thread to list reasons why homosexuality is called a "sin".
It would greatly affect homosexuals I would think, because people are practically saying that every day, homosexuals are committing a sin from the moment they get up to the time to go to bed.How does it affect/harm homosexuals or other people?
I don't think you've noticed, but "stealing" and "murdering" are verbs (i.e., they require actions). "Homosexuality" is not a verb, it is a noun; therefore, you should not compare "homosexuality" to "stealing" and "murdering"....all the other sins (stealing, murdering,...) are obviously harmful.
.In a lot of passages, "homosexuals" is "them that defile themselves with mankind" in the KJV.
I used to think that homosexuality is a sin, but last night, my eyes were opened. Homosexuality is NOT a sin, but rather, homosexual ACTS is the sin [i.e., the act of sleeping with members of the same sex; hence, the KJV says "them that defile themselves with mankind"--this gives the impression that homosexual Christians may receive salvation as long as they don't defile themselves with mankind (i.e., they don't sleep with members of the same sex)].
Homosexuality is a punishment from God [Romans 1:26-27 (context starts at Romans 1:21 it seems, but I could be wrong)]. Punishments are not sins; therefore, homosexuality is not a sin.
I am really not surprised that you ignored the points I made
You tried to claim regarding some laws no longer employed by modern Christians All of that was under the Old Testament law. Implying that hold testament law was not applicable to modern Christians.
However, the original point waaaayyyy back there was that when one picks and chooses a handful of bible verses to justify personal prejudice one is subject to having to justify why one chooses to ignore neighboring inconvenient and very un PC bible verses
This was the post you originally took umbrage to
Your defense was and remains that it is perfectly acceptable for you to pick and choose what biblical rules you wish to ignore and which ones you wish to inflict upon others.
However that really doesnt hold up to scrutiny. Either one accepts all of the old testament laws as applicable (even to oneself) or one accepts that the laws of the bible were supplement by Jesus. "A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another." John 13:34-35
I also noted and you ignored that the commandment of Jesus (John 13:34-35) tosses Romans (whatever translation is picked) out the window. Because prejudice and discrimination do not fit into the definition of love no matter how hard you try.
And again just for your reference .
Love is patient and kind. Love is not jealous or boastful or proud or rude. Love does not demand its own way. Love is not irritable, and it keeps no record of when it has been wronged. It is never glad about injustice but rejoices whenever the truth wins out. Love never gives up, never loses faith, is always hopeful, and endures through every circumstance. 1 Corinthians 13:4-7
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?