NationStates Jolt Archive

This is sort of an open topic, but i will say this, I am a christian and way to often do i see other christians go insane over homosexuality. They start damning people and all sorts of crap. The Bible talks about homesexality being wrong but it never says damn them to hell. Basically some christians need to lay off the whole fires of hell thing. I have some gay friends who know Im christian, and know what I belive as a christian but all I can do is say what I believe, and live what I believe. "You shall love your neighbor as yourself..." Mark 12:31. by the way neighbor is like everyone, you get the point.

hmm...

The Bible says that homosexuals are sinners. But then, the Bible says that everyone is a sinner. Let's hear it for salvation by grace!!:D

This is sort of an open topic, but i will say this, I am a christian and way to often do i see other christians go insane over homosexuality. They start damning people and all sorts of crap. The Bible talks about homesexality being wrong but it never says damn them to hell. Basically some christians need to lay off the whole fires of hell thing. I have some gay friends who know Im christian, and know what I belive as a christian but all I can do is say what I believe, and live what I believe. "You shall love your neighbor as yourself..." Mark 12:31. by the way neighbor is like everyone, you get the point.
Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
Leviticus 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
Romans 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. {"The natural use of the woman"
Paul explains that "the natural use" of women is to act as sexual objects for the pleasure of men.}
1 Corinthians 6:9 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,
1 Corinthians 6:10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
Does that answer your question?

Does that answer your question?

Well, isn't that all old testament? And, isn't the OT pretty much discarded after the birth of Jesus? That's what I've been told by my Lutheran friend anyway.

Well, isn't that all old testament? And, isn't the OT pretty much discarded after the birth of Jesus? That's what I've been told by my Lutheran friend anyway.
No, only Leviticus is part of the old testament
the rest is from the new

Romans and Corinthians are basically inter-church memos, stating dogma, not divine mandate. Leviticus speaks of human sacrifice and lists about 10,000 things that a person can be put to death for, many have recently been comitted by clergy. Interesting how Christians seem to pick and choose the parts of the Bible they choose to follow (or even print), all while still spouting their high morals.

Too many Christians take the Old Testament FAR too seriously, seeing as they're supposed to believe in the teachings of Christ, who said nothing about sending people to hell if they believed in Him. He said nothing about homosexuality being bad. All he wanted was for people to believe in Him and in God and to feel properly bad about being bad to each other. (Feel free to quote the Big Guy on this one if you've memorized every last passage of the Bible by heart. I'm not a Christian, nor have I read the Bible in its entirety, I'm just going by the contents of the many essays/articles I've read on the subject over the last few years. Apologies if I've offended you or someone you know, but it IS a religious thread.)

Well, isn't that all old testament? And, isn't the OT pretty much discarded after the birth of Jesus? That's what I've been told by my Lutheran friend anyway.
If the material in the OT doesn't matter then why is it still part of the bible?

Well, isn't that all old testament? And, isn't the OT pretty much discarded after the birth of Jesus?

Alright, nah, the Old Testament can't be discarded. Jesus himself would have just been a guy who performed miracles if he didn't have all those prophecies to fulfill. His claims of being God would have had no credibility in the Jewish community had he not been able to prove it by their own belief system. Thus you cannot lightly discard the Old Testament for the New.

In fact, the Bible is one book. Go figure. It's all a story of God. Ever heard of parallelism? It's used in Jewish poetry, found all throughout the Bible, especially in Psalms. As I understand it, it is the rhyming of ideas, rephrasing a concept (please correct me if I am wrong). Well, it's almost like the whole Bible is parallel verse. The Old Testament put God's love for mankind one way, and the New Testament put it another.

Of course there are many theological comparisons of the two sections, and they have validity, but you cannot entirely separate one section from another as long as you are reading the true story of God's mad love for mankind.

Does that answer your question?

I am sure someone has pointed this out to you before, but don't the leviticus ones require that one of the men have a vagina? I mean, I think we are fairly safe in that respect.

If the material in the OT doesn't matter then why is it still part of the bible?
Because many (All?) of Christ's teachings were based on things that happened in the OT, even though he negated a LOT of the auto-sins.

Romans and Corinthians are basically inter-church memos, stating dogma, not divine mandate. Leviticus speaks of human sacrifice and lists about 10,000 things that a person can be put to death for, many have recently been comitted by clergy. Interesting how Christians seem to pick and choose the parts of the Bible they choose to follow (or even print), all while still spouting their high morals.

Hear, hear.

Leviticus is stating jewish law, not divine mandate. Romans and Corinthians are basically inter-church memos, stating dogma, again, not divine mandate. Show me one place in the bible where the God of Abraham, or Jesus, actually said homosexuality is a sin.
1 Timothy 1:9-10: "Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine."
And since the bible OT & NT are supposed to be the word of god, isn't it all divine mandate?

And since the bible OT & NT are supposed to be the word of god, isn't it all divine mandate?


Explain to me how a letter that flunky B of Corith writes to hobo F of Saxxony trying to tell him about the Glory that is the Church, is Divine?

Other than if its made of Devilsfood Cake that is.

I am sure someone has pointed this out to you before,
You're wrong, no-one has...
but don't the leviticus ones require that one of the men have a vagina? I mean, I think we are fairly safe in that respect.


Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

Leviticus 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
Care to point out to me whre it says that one of the men needs to have a vagina?

1 Timothy 1:9-10: "Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine."

I think your verse there is not a condemning mandate, but it tells how the law was designed to show the "lawless and disobedient" that they are "lawless and disobedient", not to set a golden standard, or the pillars of some faith. The Law shows how screwed up we are, nothing more.

You're wrong, no-one has...



Care to point out to me whre it says that one of the men needs to have a vagina?


I think the part "As with womankind" requires a vagina, is what he is trying to say. Aparently he does not consider anal sex, sex.

Explain to me how a letter that flunky B of Corith writes to hobo F of Saxxony trying to tell him about the Glory that is the Church, is Divine?

Other than if its made of Devilsfood Cake that is.
I can't, that's what I'm looking for, an answer to the question Is the bible the word of god or is it simply the writings of men?

I think your verse there is not a condemning mandate, but it tells how the law was designed to show the "lawless and disobedient" that they are "lawless and disobedient", not to set a golden standard, or the pillars of some faith. The Law shows how screwed up we are, nothing more.


Like I said, inter-church statements and attempts a plugging up 'plot holes'.

Too many Christians take the Old Testament FAR too seriously, seeing as they're supposed to believe in the teachings of Christ, who said nothing about sending people to hell if they believed in Him. He said nothing about homosexuality being bad. All he wanted was for people to believe in Him and in God and to feel properly bad about being bad to each other. (Feel free to quote the Big Guy on this one if you've memorized every last passage of the Bible by heart. I'm not a Christian, nor have I read the Bible in its entirety, I'm just going by the contents of the many essays/articles I've read on the subject over the last few years. Apologies if I've offended you or someone you know, but it IS a religious thread.)
But JC is god, so if NT supercedes OT then that proves that god made a mistake

Because many (All?) of Christ's teachings were based on things that happened in the OT, even though he negated a LOT of the auto-sins.
That doesn't answer my question...
either the OT is to be followed or it is meaningless

1 Timothy 1:9-10: "Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine."
I think your verse there is not a condemning mandate, but it tells how the law was designed to show the "lawless and disobedient" that they are "lawless and disobedient", not to set a golden standard, or the pillars of some faith. The Law shows how screwed up we are, nothing more.
It is however another passage from the bible stating that homosexuality is evil, which these yahoos are trying to say, is not said in the bible

I can't, that's what I'm looking for, an answer to the question Is the bible the word of god or is it simply the writings of men?

Well, not being christian, I can not say it is the word of god.

But, looking at it, and I have, the bulk of its message is very good. What I would say to you, is take everything witha grain of salt, don't look at every part of it as divine truth (especially the King James Version, they cut out parts). Some authors had great ideas and had the good of their people at heart, others were meglomanicial, and only trying to change the world to support their own warped view of how it should work.

Well, not being christian, I can not say it is the word of god.
I'm not either, I was simply providing references to answer the first person's question.
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/

It is however another passage from the bible stating that homosexuality is evil, which these yahoos are trying to say, is not said in the bible


With the exception of the Psalms, you can take out any part of the NT, that is not written by an apostle, and some that were. They were all purly written by men to promote their own agendas. In polytheistic Rome, homosexuality was not only practiced, but encouraged. It was seen as a way for a master to bond with his apprentence adn form a trusting relationship. Similar praticed occured in Babylon and Egypt. So by declaring homosexuality a sin they were able to once again vilify their enemies in the eyes of the history books and in their own times.

And since the bible OT & NT are supposed to be the word of god, isn't it all divine mandate?

Tell that to Paul.

either the OT is to be followed or it is meaningless

Interesting...Jesus freed people from the law. He made people realize that knowing God is not formulaic, but relational, if you will. He showed people that He, Christ as God, wanted to know them. He showed them that this could not happen without them becoming like him. In order to become like him they must become something else, something that is expressed in the Law. The Law shows what we should be, and Christ shows us how to get there (by knowing him).

I'm not either, I was simply providing references to answer the first person's question.
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/


Then quit playing the devils advocate and let me win :(

There shouldn't be any problem at all. Christian doctrine teaches that man should rule only himself, by virtuous conduct as prescribed in the Bible. Christians that persecute homosexuals are hyprocrites to their own beliefs, and ignorant to their own sins.

I do not think homosexuality is right, but to persecute homosexuals is just plain wrong.

With the exception of the Psalms, you can take out any part of the NT, that is not written by an apostle, and some that were. They were all purly written by men to promote their own agendas. In polytheistic Rome, homosexuality was not only practiced, but encouraged. It was seen as a way for a master to bond with his apprentence adn form a trusting relationship. Similar praticed occured in Babylon and Egypt. So by declaring homosexuality a sin they were able to once again vilify their enemies in the eyes of the history books and in their own times.
So, you can just ignore the parts that you don't like?

Tell that to Paul.

Umm... Hey Paul, oh wait, you are very very dead, like 2000 years dead.

Then quit playing the devils advocate and let me win :(
Okay, you win :p

I think the part "As with womankind" requires a vagina, is what he is trying to say. Aparently he does not consider anal sex, sex.

Nor does Bill Clinton.

But anyway. Either god is cool with buggery, as long as it is a woman being buggered, or sinful homosexual sex would require one of the men to have a vagina.

I was assuming that buggery with a woman was off the table owing to other biblical prohibitions. Though maybe I am wrong about that.

So, you can just ignore the parts that you don't like?

No, there are parts that I don't like, I mean that whole love thy neighbor thing annoys me, I want to punch him in the head. You have to look at it historically and ask yourself what the authors meaning and goals were.

The writer of Revalations was trying to stir up civil unrest against the still pagan Roman Emperor.

Moses was trying to keep several thosand people unified while they were forced to lead a nomadic life in search of a home. Moses fearing the likely death of him and his people he took their stories and traditions and placed them together in one text so that they could outlive his people. He did have had to use deceit, or he may have been skitsoid(sp)/ on a lot of drugs, but his intentions were pure.

<snip>
The Law shows what we should be, and Christ shows us how to get there (by knowing him).
So how christianity works is...
Here are the rules but as long as you know me (JC) you don't have to obey them?
:confused:

I do not think homosexuality is right, but to persecute homosexuals is just plain wrong.

Ya, It's wrong to persecute them, in more ways than one. If a person is a Christian and believes the Bible and all that, and is a homosexual he is in violation of his own beliefs. But, most homosexuals are not Christians, and don't have to follow our ideology.

So how christianity works is...
Here are the rules but as long as you know me (JC) you don't have to obey them?
:confused:


Hmm maybe I should become a WASP then, that means I coudl get away with killing the loudmothed pot smoking idiot next door. Heck as long as I know JC I could exterminate <insert racial group here> and get away with it.

Here are the rules but as long as you know me (JC) you don't have to obey them?

Well, when you get to know him, it goes beyond the rules. It becomes more than the law. The righteousness laid out in the Old Testament becomes incidental.

Okay, you win :p

*Dances the Happy Dance*
:fluffle:

Nor does Bill Clinton.

But anyway. Either god is cool with buggery, as long as it is a woman being buggered, or sinful homosexual sex would require one of the men to have a vagina.

I was assuming that buggery with a woman was off the table owing to other biblical prohibitions. Though maybe I am wrong about that.
There are those who like to say that the Bible does not condemn homosexuality. Various verses are cited (out of context) and the verses that people use to show that homosexuality is wrong are explained away. The world wants to change God's words and meanings into something more suitable to its sinful desires. Nevertheless, the truth stands: The Bible condemns homosexuality as a sin. Let's look at what it says.

Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."

Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them"

1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

Rom. 1:26-28, "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 28And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper."

Homosexuality is clearly condemned by the Bible. It goes against the created order of God. He created Adam and then made a woman. This is what God has ordained and it is what is right. Unlike other sins, homosexuality has a severe judgment administered by God Himself. This judgment is simple: They are given over to their passions. That means that their hearts are allowed to be hardened by their sins (Romans 1:18ff). As a result, they can no longer see the error of what they are doing. Without an awareness of their sinfulness, there will be no repentance and trusting in Jesus. Without Jesus, they will have no forgiveness. Without forgiveness, there is no salvation.

Well, when you get to know him, it goes beyond the rules. It becomes more than the law. The righteousness laid out in the Old Testament becomes incidental.
1 John 2:4 says, "The one who says, “I have come to know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him."
:confused:
Which is it?

Romans and Corinthians are basically inter-church memos, stating dogma, not divine mandate. Leviticus speaks of human sacrifice and lists about 10,000 things that a person can be put to death for, many have recently been comitted by clergy. Interesting how Christians seem to pick and choose the parts of the Bible they choose to follow (or even print), all while still spouting their high morals.

And the thing with Leviticus, its an all or nothing affair; Jesus dismissed the kosher eating requirements in Leviticus, and thus, by dismissing that one, he dismissed the whole code in one swoop.

As for Romans and Corinthians, neither are words of Jesus, I would hardly call the rantings of an anti-female, anti-gay, anti-freedom of speech, anti-everything individual as PR spokes person for God.

Ya, It's wrong to persecute them, in more ways than one. If a person is a Christian and believes the Bible and all that, and is a homosexual he is in violation of his own beliefs. But, most homosexuals are not Christians, and don't have to follow our ideology.
What should be the Christian's Response to the Homosexual?

Just because someone is a homosexual does not mean that we cannot love him (or her) or pray for him (her). Homosexuality is a sin and like any other sin, it needs to be dealt with in the only way possible. It needs to be laid at the cross, repented of, and never done again.
As a Christian, you should pray for the salvation of the homosexual the same you would any other person in sin. The homosexual is still made in the image of God -- even though he is in grave sin. Therefore, you should show him same dignity as anyone else you come in contact with. However, this does not mean that you are to approve of their sin. Don't compromise your witness for a socially acceptable opinion that is void of godliness.

There are those who like to say that the Bible does not condemn homosexuality. Various verses are cited (out of context) and the verses that people use to show that homosexuality is wrong are explained away. The world wants to change God's words and meanings into something more suitable to its sinful desires. Nevertheless, the truth stands: The Bible condemns homosexuality as a sin. Let's look at what it says.

Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."

Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them"

1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

Rom. 1:26-28, "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 28And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper."

Homosexuality is clearly condemned by the Bible. It goes against the created order of God. He created Adam and then made a woman. This is what God has ordained and it is what is right. Unlike other sins, homosexuality has a severe judgment administered by God Himself. This judgment is simple: They are given over to their passions. That means that their hearts are allowed to be hardened by their sins (Romans 1:18ff). As a result, they can no longer see the error of what they are doing. Without an awareness of their sinfulness, there will be no repentance and trusting in Jesus. Without Jesus, they will have no forgiveness. Without forgiveness, there is no salvation.


Ohhhhhh he uses a different translation of the bible to try to distort our arguments, hmm then I guess it will be a moot point to continue this argument until we can learn to read aramaic, latin, greek, and old hebrew.

And the thing with Leviticus, its an all or nothing affair; Jesus dismissed the kosher eating requirements in Leviticus, and thus, by dismissing that one, he dismissed the whole code in one swoop.
So, you can just ignore the parts that you don't like?


As for Romans and Corinthians, neither are words of Jesus, I would hardly call the rantings of an anti-female, anti-gay, anti-freedom of speech, anti-everything individual as PR spokes person for God.
And yet there it is in the bible, so either god screwed up (thus proving that he isn't all-knowing and all-powerful), or it is all just the words of men rather than 'the word of god'

Either god is cool with buggery, as long as it is a woman being buggered, or sinful homosexual sex would require one of the men to have a vagina.

So what is the verse referring to, if not to homosexual sex?

The prohibition on anal sex between heterosexuals is derived typically from the story of Onan, and has little to do with the verses in Leviticus except that the same logic could be used against homosexual sex.

It is clear to me that that is the meaning of the verse, the issue is whether a verse almost certainly referring to an idolatrous, and likely exploitative, practice that was common three millenia ago should apply to loving, consensual, egalitarian relationships between people of the same sex today.

I say no.

And even if I thought otherwise, while I myself would be obligated to abstain from homosexual sex, it would be wrong for me to impose those views upon anyone else in a culture where doing so all too often results in horrific cruelty and ruined lives. "Thou shalt not stand idly by the blood of thy fellow."

Which is it?

Thats it. You got it. When one comes to know God he becomes righteous. Now notice that it is not an instance, it's a process. So when one "has come to know him" he has come to be like him. God is righteous, and his righteousness in us is proof of our likeness to him, but it is not the core of Christianity.

I can't, that's what I'm looking for, an answer to the question Is the bible the word of god or is it simply the writings of men?

The authors of the Bible were divinely inspired by God, but that didn't stop them from including some of their own opinions into the work (see Paul's opinion on the length of men's and women's hair in one of his letters).

Christianity teaches that the law of the Old Testament still does exist and is enforced, but also that the law had been fulfilled. God took matters into his own hands by making himself into a man and taking the punishment of all humanity's sin upon himself. He made it so that a person doesn't have to lead a perfect life in order to receive God's grace, so that everyone no matter what they have done in the past can be with him in heaven.

As you can probably tell, I am a christian, but I see homosexuality as pretty much of a non-issue now. All sin is equal in God's eyes, so a person who say tells a lie now and then isn't any better or worse than a person who practices homosexuality, and a homosexual christian needn't worry where they end up after death. Besides, it seems to me, of all sin, Jesus was concerned with hypocrisy and selfishness the most.

Woah. I actually didn't mean to write this long a post...

Ohhhhhh he uses a different translation of the bible to try to distort our arguments, hmm then I guess it will be a moot point to continue this argument until we can learn to read aramaic, latin, greek, and old hebrew.
Actually I did it because someone (don't recall who {and am to lazy to go look}) complain about my using excerpts from the King James version, but not a bad idea, not to mention we should get hold of the original documents ;)




edit: and a little bit for the reason you said

No, he is saying Jesus, as in God, said, "Ignore Leviticus". Hence God said, "Homo-sex is okay by me!", and then promptly gave the 'Buddy Christ' pose.

The authors of the Bible were divinely inspired by God, but that didn't stop them from including some of their own opinions into the work (see Paul's opinion on the length of men's and women's hair in one of his letters).

Christianity teaches that the law of the Old Testament still does exist and is enforced, but also that the law had been fulfilled. God took matters into his own hands by making himself into a man and taking the punishment of all humanity's sin upon himself. He made it so that a person doesn't have to lead a perfect life in order to receive God's grace, so that everyone no matter what they have done in the past can be with him in heaven.

As you can probably tell, I am a christian, but I see homosexuality as pretty much of a non-issue now. All sin is equal in God's eyes, so a person who say tells a lie now and then isn't any better or worse than a person who practices homosexuality, and a homosexual christian needn't worry where they end up after death. Besides, it seems to me, of all sin, Jesus was concerned with hypocrisy and selfishness the most.

Woah. I actually didn't mean to write this long a post...


Dude, I love you.

The authors of the Bible were divinely inspired by God, but that didn't stop them from including some of their own opinions into the work (see Paul's opinion on the length of men's and women's hair in one of his letters).

Christianity teaches that the law of the Old Testament still does exist and is enforced, but also that the law had been fulfilled. God took matters into his own hands by making himself into a man and taking the punishment of all humanity's sin upon himself. He made it so that a person doesn't have to lead a perfect life in order to receive God's grace, so that everyone no matter what they have done in the past can be with him in heaven.

As you can probably tell, I am a christian, but I see homosexuality as pretty much of a non-issue now. All sin is equal in God's eyes, so a person who say tells a lie now and then isn't any better or worse than a person who practices homosexuality, and a homosexual christian needn't worry where they end up after death. Besides, it seems to me, of all sin, Jesus was concerned with hypocrisy and selfishness the most.

Woah. I actually didn't mean to write this long a post...


1 John 2:4 says, "The one who says, “I have come to know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him."

according to this the homosexual will end up in hell, so why shouldn't they worry?

How comes god doesn't smite the homosexuals then, if he finds them so distasteful? He's been known to do such things in the past.

I would argue that my interpretation is correct, due to the lack of smiting.

according to this the homosexual will end up in hell, so why shouldn't they worry?

But they would go to hell anyway because of all the OTHER sins that they have done. So it doesn't matter if homosexuality is a sin or not because if a homosexual hadn't received Christ then they'd go to hell anyway, but if they did then their sin would be forgiven and they'd go to heaven.

How comes god doesn't smite the homosexuals then, if he finds them so distasteful? He's been known to do such things in the past.

I would argue that my interpretation is correct, due to the lack of smiting.
I've broken most if not all of the commandments and haven't been smited (smitten?), what's your point?

[Quote]
1 John 2:4 says, "The one who says, “I have come to know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him."[Quote]

according to this the homosexual will end up in hell, so why shouldn't they worry?

John != 1 John or 2 John.

1 John and 2 John were not written by the apostle, but were again church memos. He was condeming pagan rituals, such as the celebration of the birthday of Sol Inviticus (Dec. 25th), and the druidic celebration of Yule (Dec. 27th- Jan. 2) which involved the decoration of the local tree's with the entrails of sacrafices. Guess what the church did to try and convert these people later.

You seem to think its an all or none thing. Instead of just quoting single lines from a webiste try reading and understanding not just the message, but the ideas behind it and what the intentions of the writers were.

But they would go to hell anyway because of all the OTHER sins that they have done. So it doesn't matter if homosexuality is a sin or not because if a homosexual hadn't received Christ then they'd go to hell anyway, but if they did then their sin would be forgiven and they'd go to heaven.
Can practicing homosexuals be saved?


If a by "practicing homosexual" is meant a person who is openly approving of homosexuality and is engaged in it, can this person be saved? Yes and no. Yes because any sinner has the potential of becoming saved. On the other hand, if the person is professing to be a Christian yet is unrepentantly practicing homosexuality, then it would appear that he would not be saved. 1 John 2:4 says, "The one who says, “I have come to know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him." So, a homosexual can be saved, but once saved, the Spirit of God will move that person to repent of the sin of homosexuality. If a person continues to unrepentantly practice homosexuality, promoting it, etc., then that person would not be demonstrating evidence of regeneration.
But then again, a person could become saved, still fall into homosexuality, be convicted by the Spirit of the sin, all the while be seeking to break free from it. So technically, in this last sense, he could be saved and be a homosexual -- not as a life style, but as in struggling against his sin which sometimes can get the best of him. It would be like a drug addict becoming a Christian and still being hooked on drugs. He would struggle against and still have the desire to participate in it.
I would say that a person who has professed Christ and is struggling against sin is demonstrating evidence of regeneration. Remember, many people who become Christians still struggle with many of their old sins. Even Paul struggled, "For the good that I wish, I do not do; but I practice the very evil that I do not wish," (Rom. 7:19). We are not perfect and we must remember to be gracious to others, especially when they are stuck in an old sin, want to repent of it, and are trying to have victory over it. This is when grace is need, not law. But, of course, we are never to encourage or excuse a person's sin. We must pray for them to attain full victory.
Now, some Christians will state that once you become saved, you should automatically have victory over all your sins. This is an unfortunate burden they place on many Christians because "perfection" becomes the standard for measuring whether or not they are Christians. This can cause people to doubt their salvation. While it is true that we have victory in many areas when we become saved, it is also true that we still struggle with many of our old sins. Of course, it is never okay for us to go ahead and sin (Rom. 6:1-2). We must always struggle for holiness. But the fact is, like Paul, we sometimes do the things we don't want to do and don't do what we should. It is our struggle against sin that demonstrates that we are regenerate since we are seeking to be holy as God is holy (1 Pet. 1:16).

But they would go to hell anyway because of all the OTHER sins that they have done. So it doesn't matter if homosexuality is a sin or not because if a homosexual hadn't received Christ then they'd go to hell anyway, but if they did then their sin would be forgiven and they'd go to heaven.


He is quoting 1 John saying that if one is to commit any sin after embracing jesus, then he never embraced jesus and thus will be going to hell

1 John 2:4 says, "The one who says, “I have come to know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him."

John != 1 John or 2 John.

1 John and 2 John were not written by the apostle, but were again church memos. He was condeming pagan rituals, such as the celebration of the birthday of Sol Inviticus (Dec. 25th), and the druidic celebration of Yule (Dec. 27th- Jan. 2) which involved the decoration of the local tree's with the entrails of sacrafices. Guess what the church did to try and convert these people later.

You seem to think its an all or none thing. Instead of just quoting single lines from a webiste try reading and understanding not just the message, but the ideas behind it and what the intentions of the writers were.
Why should I bother? I am not a christian, nor will I ever be one. I am learning (more) about christianity by pointing vaguaries of the bible and reading christians reactions to them.

Oh, and as an aside I do feel that the general teachings of the NT are a pretty good guide to how to live your life. I just take issue with all organized religion

He is quoting 1 John saying that if one is to commit any sin after embracing jesus, then he never embraced jesus and thus will be going to hell
:cool: exactamundo :cool:

Why should I bother? I am not a christian, nor will I ever be one. I am learning (more) about christianity by pointing vaguaries of the bible and reading christians reactions to them.

Oh, and as an aside I do feel that the general teachings of the NT are a pretty good guide to how to live your life. I just take issue with all organized religion

Like I said, read it, so you can take things in context, and try if you can to read the full version, not the one that cuts out lilith and rips out half a book to make a statement against masturbation.

Like I said, read it, so you can take things in context, and try if you can to read the full version, not the one that cuts out lilith and rips out half a book to make a statement against masturbation.
I have actually read the bible (not sure which version, and don't care the only way I would believe in the christian god is if he appeared to me (and probably not even then since I would most likely assume I had been hallucionating).
http://www.carm.org/

I have actually read the bible (not sure which version, and don't care the only way I would believe in the christian god is if he appeared to me (and probably not even then since I would most likely assume I had been hallucionating).
http://www.carm.org/

I would suggest another source, they would give you a bad view of christians.

I honestly just think it's funny that the Judeo-Christian bible would say that men couldn't do anything of that sort, but nothing about women doing it. Apparently, gay guys are wrong, but lesbians are perfectly fine. :fluffle:

I would suggest another source, they would give you a bad view of christians.
If you have better sources put them up, personally I like carm.org, it's funny :)

I too am a christian however the young people of this generation do not see sexuality as something to be taken harshly. I agree it is wrong but that doesn't mean that all homosexuals should rot in hell.

I honestly just think it's funny that the Judeo-Christian bible would say that men couldn't do anything of that sort, but nothing about women doing it. Apparently, gay guys are wrong, but lesbians are perfectly fine. :fluffle:
I see nothing wrong with that view :D

although this apparently is a condemnation of lesbians
Romans 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
Romans 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

There are one of two possibilities here:

1: God is all knowing. As He is all knowing, He is all understanding. He is compassionate and merciful. He, therefore, understands the wages of sin and why people do them and forgives them because He understands that they do not commit them out of inherent evil, but out of some other injustice done on them. In this version, God is benevolent and loves His children. No one goes to hell, and it doesn't matter which (if any) path one takes to find God, as God loves and accepts all His children. This is the God of the New Testament and the Quran. Such a God would also surely be embraced by Buddhism as being an enlightened deity.

2: God is a vengeful, tyrannical deity. He somehow is offended by small acts committed by the small beings he created. His motivation may be love, but it is a deeply twisted form of love. As they call it, 'tough love'. Those who offend Him deserve little more than pity from their fellows and are condemned to an eternity in the Lake of Fire for their sins, which they may or may not have been unable to avoid (like, say, pagans before missionaries converted them, Muslims, non-[insert denomination] Christians, Jews, Buddhist, &c.). Because everyone sins, we are all abberations, offensive to God's eyes and everyone will go to hell. This is the God of the Puritans and the Religious Right, of the Old Testament and of Islamic fundamentalists. He is your Father, He is angry, and He has His belt off, and boy, you just asked for a whuppin'!

Either way, one need not worry about going to hell. Either we are all going to heaven or we are all going to hell, and there's nothing we can do about it, due to our inherent flaws.

1 John 2:4 says, "The one who says, “I have come to know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him."

Personally, I think that applies more to Jesus's commandment of loving God with all your heart, soul, and mind, and to love your neighbor as yourself.

Why should I bother? I am not a christian, nor will I ever be one. I am learning (more) about christianity by pointing vaguaries of the bible and reading christians reactions to them.

Fair enough. I honestly like what you're doing; it prompts christians to carefully think about their beliefs, even if it eventually loses their faith. Faith without the backing of reason would barely stand.

Ha.

Barbara Walters is talking about Heaven and sex in heaven right now on Conan.

Fair enough. I honestly like what you're doing; it prompts christians to carefully think about their beliefs, even if it eventually loses their faith. Faith without the backing of reason would barely stand.
I just wish that more of the christians I've dealt with IRL were capable of that :(

Ha.

Barbara Walters is talking about Heaven and sex in heaven right now on Conan.
If there's no sex in heaven I don't want to go not that I will be anyways

There are one of two possibilities here:

1: God is all knowing. As He is all knowing, He is all understanding. He is compassionate and merciful. He, therefore, understands the wages of sin and why people do them and forgives them because He understands that they do not commit them out of inherent evil, but out of some other injustice done on them. In this version, God is benevolent and loves His children. No one goes to hell, and it doesn't matter which (if any) path one takes to find God, as God loves and accepts all His children. This is the God of the New Testament and the Quran. Such a God would also surely be embraced by Buddhism as being an enlightened deity.

2: God is a vengeful, tyrannical deity. He somehow is offended by small acts committed by the small beings he created. His motivation may be love, but it is a deeply twisted form of love. As they call it, 'tough love'. Those who offend Him deserve little more than pity from their fellows and are condemned to an eternity in the Lake of Fire for their sins, which they may or may not have been unable to avoid (like, say, pagans before missionaries converted them, Muslims, non-[insert denomination] Christians, Jews, Buddhist, &c.). Because everyone sins, we are all abberations, offensive to God's eyes and everyone will go to hell. This is the God of the Puritans and the Religious Right, of the Old Testament and of Islamic fundamentalists. He is your Father, He is angry, and He has His belt off, and boy, you just asked for a whuppin'!

Either way, one need not worry about going to hell. Either we are all going to heaven or we are all going to hell, and there's nothing we can do about it, due to our inherent flaws.

God is neither and both of the definitions you described. He is a loving, knowing, understanding god, but as the creator of the universe he feels that things sorta ought to be going his way.

I seriously doubt there's sex in heaven. As far as I know, souls have no genetalia.

Baran-Duine, how's this for a source? http://www.christianalliance.org/site/c.bnKIIQNtEoG/b.592941/k.CB7C/Home.htm

<snip>
I seriously doubt there's sex in heaven. As far as I know, souls have no genetalia.
Are you sure? Have you checked? ;)
Baran-Duine, how's this for a source? http://www.christianalliance.org/site/c.bnKIIQNtEoG/b.592941/k.CB7C/Home.htm
I don't know, didn't seem that funny at a quick glance ;)
seriously though it did look like it had some interesting info

I didn't post it as a funny link to a wacko group, I just wanted to show that not all christians are messed up.

And how in the hell am I supposed to tell my soul's sex?

I didn't post it as a funny link to a wacko group, I just wanted to show that not all christians are messed up.
You obviously didn't read the fine print or notice this ->;)
And how in the hell am I supposed to tell my soul's sex?
Ask it discreetly in polite conversation? :confused:

God is neither and both of the definitions you described. He is a loving, knowing, understanding god, but as the creator of the universe he feels that things sorta ought to be going his way.

I seriously doubt there's sex in heaven. As far as I know, souls have no genetalia.

Baran-Duine, how's this for a source? http://www.christianalliance.org/site/c.bnKIIQNtEoG/b.592941/k.CB7C/Home.htm

Because God created the universe, He had control over all things. He gave human kind Free Will. How, then, can He act out-raged when we excercize the gift He gave us? Does He, perhaps, feel that we cannot truly love Him, unless we are free to choose to do so? And, if He does leave us free to choose how to love Him, why does it matter in which form we choose to love Him? Can it not be possible that all religions are the creation of humans, imperfect beings, in our own feeble way to understand a being perfect beyond human reckoning? If He gave us freewill and condemns those of us who refuse to acknowledge Him, can it truly be said that He loves us? That He gave us free will and punishes us for using it is His way of expressing His love for us?

Because God created the universe, He had control over all things. He gave human kind Free Will. How, then, can He act out-raged when we excercize the gift He gave us? Does He, perhaps, feel that we cannot truly love Him, unless we are free to choose to do so? And, if He does leave us free to choose how to love Him, why does it matter in which form we choose to love Him? Can it not be possible that all religions are the creation of humans, imperfect beings, in our own feeble way to understand a being perfect beyond human reckoning? If He gave us freewill and condemns those of us who refuse to acknowledge Him, can it truly be said that He loves us? That He gave us free will and punishes us for using it is His way of expressing His love for us?

Apparently yes.

Apparently yes.

You dispicable man! Would you like a job? I like your logic! You're fired!

Ah. Forgive me for not noticing; it is quite late for me. I think I meant to put a :) at the end of the first sentence, or something.

The thing I'm worried is, what if one's soul gender is opposite my physical? That would raise a very interesting theological debate, indeed.

Ah. Forgive me for not noticing; it is quite late for me. I think I meant to put a :) at the end of the first sentence, or something.

The thing I'm worried is, what if one's soul gender is opposite my physical? That would raise a very interesting theological debate, indeed.
Well, a soul's gender being opposite of the physical would be a reasonable explanation for homosexuality

Well, a soul's gender being opposite of the physical would be a reasonable explanation for homosexuality

What if our souls are hermaphroditic and the only thing that makes us opposite-gender-lust is whatever gender our bodies are? But sometimes, the soul feels the need for either, both, or the same gender and thus leading to genetic changes in our DNA, resulting in homosexuality? What if there's reincarnation? Does that mean that the Buddhas get to have sex in heaven?

What if our souls are hermaphroditic and the only thing that makes us opposite-gender-lust is whatever gender our bodies are? But sometimes, the soul feels the need for either, both, or the same gender and thus leading to genetic changes in our DNA, resulting in homosexuality? What if there's reincarnation? Does that mean that the Buddhas get to have sex in heaven?
Yes?

Yes?

OK?

OK?
OK

Because God created the universe, He had control over all things. He gave human kind Free Will. How, then, can He act out-raged when we excercize the gift He gave us? Does He, perhaps, feel that we cannot truly love Him, unless we are free to choose to do so? And, if He does leave us free to choose how to love Him, why does it matter in which form we choose to love Him? Can it not be possible that all religions are the creation of humans, imperfect beings, in our own feeble way to understand a being perfect beyond human reckoning? If He gave us freewill and condemns those of us who refuse to acknowledge Him, can it truly be said that He loves us? That He gave us free will and punishes us for using it is His way of expressing His love for us?

Very interesting question. I'm a little tired, but I'll try my best to answer. The way I see it is this; God is an absolutely perfect being. He created mankind to reflect himself, but when his creation sinned it became imperfect. An imperfect being could not be in the presence of God, because that would be a paradox. God then created the covenant between him and man in order try and bring perfection back to mankind. Unfortunately, despite considerable leeway on God's part (yes, it's true), mankind was unable to keep it's end of the bargain. So, God sent himself as his son to earth, not only to save mankind from doom it set upon itself, but (possibly) to understand what it is like to be tempted to sin. So God only wanted people to recognize his authority, because it was the only way they could escape sin and death. I hope that all made sense.

As far as other religions being made by humans in order to understand perfection, the answer is mostly. A lot of other religions past and present didn't care much about attaining perfection and only paid attention to earthly things.

What if our souls are hermaphroditic and the only thing that makes us opposite-gender-lust is whatever gender our bodies are? But sometimes, the soul feels the need for either, both, or the same gender and thus leading to genetic changes in our DNA, resulting in homosexuality? What if there's reincarnation? Does that mean that the Buddhas get to have sex in heaven?

I believe that's largely true. However, I think homosexuality is brought about by a person's life experiences, personal psychology, and personality.

Very interesting question. I'm a little tired, but I'll try my best to answer. The way I see it is this; God is an absolutely perfect being. He created mankind to reflect himself, but when his creation sinned it became imperfect. An imperfect being could not be in the presence of God, because that would be a paradox. God then created the covenant between him and man in order try and bring perfection back to mankind. Unfortunately, despite considerable leeway on God's part (yes, it's true), mankind was unable to keep it's end of the bargain. So, God sent himself as his son to earth, not only to save mankind from doom it set upon itself, but (possibly) to understand what it is like to be tempted to sin. So God only wanted people to recognize his authority, because it was the only way they could escape sin and death. I hope that all made sense.

As far as other religions being made by humans in order to understand perfection, the answer is mostly. A lot of other religions past and present didn't care much about attaining perfection and only paid attention to earthly things.



I believe that's largely true. However, I think homosexuality is brought about by a person's life experiences, personal psychology, and personality.

But god is omniscient (sp?) so he therefore knew that man would fail, both in maintaining perfection in the Garden of Eden and in re-attaining it, thusly disproving that god truly wanted man to succeed

Well, the sun will be rising soon, so I ought to head off to bed
g'night all

But god is omniscient (sp?) so he therefore knew that man would fail, both in maintaining perfection in the Garden of Eden and in re-attaining it, thusly disproving that god truly wanted man to succeed

Or maybe he wanted man to succeed, but didn't want man to succeed?

But god is omniscient (sp?) so he therefore knew that man would fail, both in maintaining perfection in the Garden of Eden and in re-attaining it, thusly disproving that god truly wanted man to succeed

That raises an interesting question. God knows all things, but does that mean that he knows the outcome of all things? Can God see into the future, or does he orchestrate events on earth to bring his agenda about?

But the question has little consequence when it comes to the fate of mankind, as God has already intervened and taken our punishment upon himself. We don't have to worry about being perfect in accordance to the law, because the punishment no longer applies to those who accept Jesus as their savior. I'm not saying the question has no merit, it's just that we needn't worry so much about it. The real question now is, what took him so long in the first place?

Many things to consider, but not for me right now. Good night.

Or maybe he wanted man to succeed, but didn't want man to succeed?

You're getting that confused with the Matrix. ;)

I'd like to point out, lest I be lampooned as some kind of wishy-washy liberal type, that I'm actually a conservative Anglican. I started questioning my sexuality when I was about 13, and it was a result of that questioning that I eventually found God.

I am now confirmed as an Anglican, but am also at ease with my homosexuality. This does not, of course, mean that I leap into bed with every boy that I can find. I'm a virgin, and have only ever had one boyfriend.

I go onto websites quite a lot when I spot this kind of issue, because it's something I feel very strongly about. However, I am rather a busy chap and so when it's as long as this one is, I tend not to read it all and I haven't, so I aplogise in advance if I have repeated myself.

Point the first: http://www.cathedralofhope.com/homosexuality/index.php

Point the second:

I believe that's largely true. However, I think homosexuality is brought about by a person's life experiences, personal psychology, and personality.

It has been found by scientists (either in Sweden or Switzerland, I forget which) that homosexuality is at least partly, perhaps mostly or even almost entirely, a result of genetic make-up. There is, however, also evidence to suggest that environmental factors do have a certain impact: the youngest son of the family is most likely to be gay, for example. I'm the eldest.;)

Because God created the universe, He had control over all things. He gave human kind Free Will. How, then, can He act out-raged when we excercize the gift He gave us? Does He, perhaps, feel that we cannot truly love Him, unless we are free to choose to do so? And, if He does leave us free to choose how to love Him, why does it matter in which form we choose to love Him? Can it not be possible that all religions are the creation of humans, imperfect beings, in our own feeble way to understand a being perfect beyond human reckoning? If He gave us freewill and condemns those of us who refuse to acknowledge Him, can it truly be said that He loves us? That He gave us free will and punishes us for using it is His way of expressing His love for us?

Both Thomas Aquinas and St Augustine argued that we are not capable of exercising free will: that was gifted to our forebears in the Garden of Eden. i.e. we could either choose to sin or choose not to sin. We chose to sin, and now we cannot help but sin. That is why we require Jesus.

If God truly intended for men and women only to get it on with the opposite sex, then men wouldnt find men attractive, nor would women find women attractive.

When God created humanity, he gave us free-will. God gave us free-will, because in his image we were the reflection of perfection and being a robot is in no way perfect. With this free-will we sinned, seperating us from God and thus our need for salvation.

Our salvation came through Christ, who died on the cross for our sins. Through excepting his grace, and excepting Christ into our hearts, the sin is forgiven and our connection to God is reestablished through christ.

However, part of excepting Jesus is allowing him to have control over our lives. Not right away necessarily, but slowly giving ourselves over to him. Jesus being perfect, does not sin and thus a Christian can not "live in sin". Living in sin versus sinning are completely different. Living in sin is sinning without repentence and agknowledgement of the sin while sin in itself is human nature, the inability of someone to allow Christ to take over that portion of his life and thus free him of that sin is "living in sin" In the state of living in sin, that portion of our lives is not given over to Jesus and thus seperates us from God.

The homosexuality described in the bible is the ACT of sexual relations with someone of the same sex. Homosexuality is NOT having the physical attraction to someone of the same sex in its biblical form. Therefore, the state of living in sin by homosexuality is by sleeping with someone of the same sex, outside of Gods plan of heterosexual marital sex, in the same way that having heterosexual sex outside of marriage is living in sin.

If a Homosexual recieves Christ, he would be convicted of his sin and slowly become more Christ-like and thus as a reaction of Christ within him he would give up his sexuality to God.


That is what I've come to understand from my reading of the bible.

I'm going to have to apologise for not reading the whole thread before posting this, but I kind of have to pay for every minute I have online.

My friend is a lesbian, and a Christian(I think. She may have fallen away a bit- I havn't seen her for ages). She was raped when she was a mere four years old. Turning to homosexuality was a natural response, and though I do think it was a bad thing, I see it as a mental illness, and I will not look down on her for it.

Of course homosexuality is a sin, but we should not try and shame anyone guilty of it in an attempt to make them see how evil they are and repent. Not many people will want to listen to you if you start raving about how eveil they are, if any.

Who did Jesus associate with? Not the upright and the righteous, but the whores and the tax collecters.

When God created humanity, he gave us free-will. God gave us free-will, because in his image we were the reflection of perfection and being a robot is in no way perfect. With this free-will we sinned, seperating us from God and thus our need for salvation.

Our salvation came through Christ, who died on the cross for our sins. Through excepting his grace, and excepting Christ into our hearts, the sin is forgiven and our connection to God is reestablished through christ.

However, part of excepting Jesus is allowing him to have control over our lives. Not right away necessarily, but slowly giving ourselves over to him. Jesus being perfect, does not sin and thus a Christian can not "live in sin". Living in sin versus sinning are completely different. Living in sin is sinning without repentence and agknowledgement of the sin while sin in itself is human nature, the inability of someone to allow Christ to take over that portion of his life and thus free him of that sin is "living in sin" In the state of living in sin, that portion of our lives is not given over to Jesus and thus seperates us from God.

The homosexuality described in the bible is the ACT of sexual relations with someone of the same sex. Homosexuality is NOT having the physical attraction to someone of the same sex in its biblical form. Therefore, the state of living in sin by homosexuality is by sleeping with someone of the same sex, outside of Gods plan of heterosexual marital sex, in the same way that having heterosexual sex outside of marriage is living in sin.

If a Homosexual recieves Christ, he would be convicted of his sin and slowly become more Christ-like and thus as a reaction of Christ within him he would give up his sexuality to God.


That is what I've come to understand from my reading of the bible.

I doubt that. I would surmise that that's what you've come to understand from being directed by others.

From my own personal experience, I have (and still do) ask God to remove my homosexuality if it offends him. Instead, all I've found is that He is showing me that this is how He intended me to be. For example, I am now certain that I am gay, whereas in the beginning I was not. And that is a result of God showing me and answering my prayers.

You raise the point that heterosexual marital relations are the only acceptable basis for sexual intercourse. Did you know that the early Church invented the state of matrimony? This is after the time of St Paul, I believe. Moreover, there is evidence to suggest that one of the first 'marriages' was between two men.

You 'right on' christians are part of the freaking problem. You take your guidance from a book that is proported to be written thousands of years ago by a different culture that you have no understanding of, you have no mind of your own, you can't make your own decisions on the current state of things without your little book. Why is homosexuality wrong? Why did god or some hebrew guy say it was wrong? Are the reasons still the same? Is it still applicable? These questions are rhetorical.

You bang on about evolution being an unproved theory but all you offer as an explanation is some crackpot idea about creationism which offers even less proof, sorry, zero proof. You preach love, but all I ever see is prejudice and hate and when confronted it's always someone elses religon or the fundamentalists that are the problem. You all complain that the world is going to hell, well it's people like YOU that are sending there.

I've been happly married for 5 years before you all start thinking I'm trying to stand up homosexuality because of my lifestyle. I'm 32 and I've never commited a homosexual act nor do I have any desire to.

Homosexuality is'nt an abomination, you are. You all deserve to burn along with the muslims, jews and other feeble-minded religous nuts for the misery you've caused the rest of us.

My, this is getting interesting. *subscribes*

I doubt that. I would surmise that that's what you've come to understand from being directed by others.

From my own personal experience, I have (and still do) ask God to remove my homosexuality if it offends him. Instead, all I've found is that He is showing me that this is how He intended me to be. For example, I am now certain that I am gay, whereas in the beginning I was not. And that is a result of God showing me and answering my prayers.

You raise the point that heterosexual marital relations are the only acceptable basis for sexual intercourse. Did you know that the early Church invented the state of matrimony? This is after the time of St Paul, I believe. Moreover, there is evidence to suggest that one of the first 'marriages' was between two men.

Fair enough, however you ignored my point that homosexuality(the act) is a choice. Although you call yourself gay due to your attraction to the same sex, it is clear in James 1:15, our desires themselves are not sin, but when our desires are concieved they bring forth sin.

The bible makes it clear that sex outside of marriage is sin. Matt 5:27-28). (Matt 15:19-20). (Acts 15:20,29). (1 Thess 4:2-5)- countless more


While the current legal tradition of marriage might not apply, marriage in the traditional sense of bonding two people through celebration does as almost all cultures have ritualized celebration of bonding individuals. To believe the Jews didn't, is ignorance.

I describe sin as anything that seperates us from God. God does not commit acts which would be concerned as an abomination, thus by living in an state of abomination we are seperating ourselves from God.


"You shall not lie with men as with woman: it is abomination."

DEUTERONOMY 23:17-18

Don't attempt to justify sin with the church, the church has never been a pillar of innocence and will unlikely to be until they concentrate on God and not politcal structure and world politics. Jesus preaches that your either for him or against him. Allegance to the church is not allegance to Jesus.

You preach love, but all I ever see is prejudice and hate and when confronted it's always someone elses religon or the fundamentalists that are the problem. You all complain that the world is going to hell, well it's people like YOU that are sending there.

Homosexuality is'nt an abomination, you are. [You all deserve to burn along with the muslims, jews and other feeble-minded religous nuts for the misery you've caused the rest of us.


Don't you think you've got your fair share of "prejudice and hate" in that post?

I could write a lengthy post about everything I feel on every issue debated here. I could also look up many sources of data to back up what I say.
Unfortunatley, like in every situation of the sort, no one changes. You aren't changing our ideas, we aren't changing yours. We just end up in a stalemate.

I have come to believe that dedicated atheists like yourself will never come to believe and I don't care to try and change your mind on that. I'm not damning anyone, God can handle that. I don't give much support to apologetics.

So in the end nothing changes, the truth stays the same no matter what we argue. If you are right you stay right. If we are right we stay right. If no one is right than whatever is stays that way.

The reason I posted was to ask that you don't throw accusations at someone else and then do the same thing yourself. If you do, you are being just as much a hypocrite as you claim we are.

Basicly, I see it like this. Love the sinner, hate sin. Its no Christians place to judge people for sins. Thats God's job. We can no more condem anyone to hell than we can confirm ourselves to hevan. Thats God's job. However there is a difference between judging people for sins and pointing out what is and isnt a sin.

If God truly intended for men and women only to get it on with the opposite sex, then men wouldnt find men attractive, nor would women find women attractive.

If God truely intended people not to steal things then he wouldnt have given us that ablity

What your asking for here is a race of people without free will. That is not what God created

When God created humanity, he gave us free-will. God gave us free-will, because in his image we were the reflection of perfection and being a robot is in no way perfect. With this free-will we sinned, seperating us from God and thus our need for salvation.

Our salvation came through Christ, who died on the cross for our sins. Through excepting his grace, and excepting Christ into our hearts, the sin is forgiven and our connection to God is reestablished through christ.

However, part of excepting Jesus is allowing him to have control over our lives. Not right away necessarily, but slowly giving ourselves over to him. Jesus being perfect, does not sin and thus a Christian can not "live in sin". Living in sin versus sinning are completely different. Living in sin is sinning without repentence and agknowledgement of the sin while sin in itself is human nature, the inability of someone to allow Christ to take over that portion of his life and thus free him of that sin is "living in sin" In the state of living in sin, that portion of our lives is not given over to Jesus and thus seperates us from God.

The homosexuality described in the bible is the ACT of sexual relations with someone of the same sex. Homosexuality is NOT having the physical attraction to someone of the same sex in its biblical form. Therefore, the state of living in sin by homosexuality is by sleeping with someone of the same sex, outside of Gods plan of heterosexual marital sex, in the same way that having heterosexual sex outside of marriage is living in sin.

If a Homosexual recieves Christ, he would be convicted of his sin and slowly become more Christ-like and thus as a reaction of Christ within him he would give up his sexuality to God.


That is what I've come to understand from my reading of the bible.


But Christ didn't have sex with anybody. Does this mean that those who accept Christ and become more Christ-like, but who started out as heterosexuals, give p their sexuality, too?

But Christ didn't have sex with anybody. Does this mean that those who accept Christ and become more Christ-like, but who started out as heterosexuals, give p their sexuality, too?Christ didn't have sex with anybody. He also died an excruciatingly painful death. We don't have to emulate His life on eath to the letter, but it pays to follow His teachings.

Translated from the Dutch Willibrord translation:

When a women gets a child and it is a boy, then she will be unclean for seven days, as she is during menstruation. (...) Thirty-three days it will take before she is clean of the blood of the birth; (...) If she has brought a girl into the world, then she will be unclean for two weeks as she is during menstruation. Thirty-six days it will take before she is clean of the blood of the birth. When, after the birth of a son or daughter, the day of her cleansing has arrived, she is to offer the priest at the entrance of the tent of gathering a lamb less than a year old for a burn offering and a turtle dove and a pigeon for a sin offering
Leviticus, Chapter 12, verses 1 through 6

This clearly shows that I, who am not female and do not intend to marry or have children, will never become unclean in any way and I will go straight to heaven.

Sure, Leviticus, Chapter 22, verse 31 says "Thou art to strictly maintain my commandments. I am Jahweh", but that one doesn't really count any more in this day and age, right? Only Chapter 12 holds some actual significant modern importance.

Jesus being perfect, does not sin and thus a Christian can not "live in sin". Living in sin versus sinning are completely different. Living in sin is sinning without repentence and agknowledgement of the sin while sin in itself is human nature, the inability of someone to allow Christ to take over that portion of his life and thus free him of that sin is "living in sin" In the state of living in sin, that portion of our lives is not given over to Jesus and thus seperates us from God.


People cannot help living in sin; it's a sin to say that you don't sin. Just because a person doesn't realize the act they have committed at the time was sin, and therefore hadn't repented, doesn't mean they are condemned for it.

If a Homosexual recieves Christ, he would be convicted of his sin and slowly become more Christ-like and thus as a reaction of Christ within him he would give up his sexuality to God.

That's a little presumptious, in my opinion.

Not many people will want to listen to you if you start raving about how eveil they are, if any.

Who did Jesus associate with? Not the upright and the righteous, but the whores and the tax collecters.

That's exactly right. We could use more christians like you. :)

From my own personal experience, I have (and still do) ask God to remove my homosexuality if it offends him.

People are responsible for their own choices and lifestyles; if God is offended by your choices, it's your responsibility to change yourself, not God's. He won't snap his fingers and magically fix you, but he would provide love and support for you to seek the solution on your own.

Basicly, I see it like this. Love the sinner, hate sin. Its no Christians place to judge people for sins. Thats God's job. We can no more condem anyone to hell than we can confirm ourselves to hevan. Thats God's job. However there is a difference between judging people for sins and pointing out what is and isnt a sin.

Exactly. Our purpose as christians is to point the way, nothing more.

first of all, christianity is no more than a theory so lets not go "damning" a large percent of the world's population because somebody has brainwashed you all from birth to believe in their own perceptions of reality. "Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the priviledge to do so, too" Voltaire once said this and it could not be any more true. come on people, wake up and start thinking on your own terms.

first of all, christianity is no more than a theory so lets not go "damning" a large percent of the world's population because somebody has brainwashed you all from birth to believe in their own perceptions of reality. "Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the priviledge to do so, too" Voltaire once said this and it could not be any more true. come on people, wake up and start thinking on your own terms.

Who are you to call christians brainwashed drones? We have invested much thought into our faith; I even ask myself why I believe the way I do. The reason that I keep coming back to, is because of what I have experienced as a christian. I haven't seen God, Jesus, or the Holy Spirit, but I have felt their tangible presence; you've probably seen images of christians dropping to the floor--I'm not shitting you you actually feel a weight on your chest pushing you down. We live by the principles written down in a book, but we do not blindly follow it without putting any thought or consideration (though I can't speak for all christians in the world, unfortunately).

I hope that didn't sound harsh...

That's exactly right. We could use more christians like you. :)I'm an antiscoial depressed goth who swears too much and listens to Rage Against the Machine a lot.

Are you sure about that? :D

I'm an antiscoial depressed goth who swears too much and listens to Rage Against the Machine a lot.

Are you sure about that? :D

Hell, yeah! Differences are good for christianity. If we were all the same way, we'd be the mindless robots everyone thinks we are.

This is sort of an open topic, but i will say this, I am a christian and way to often do i see other christians go insane over homosexuality. They start damning people and all sorts of crap.
I think that just because it's topical today many Christians and Muslims lose their sense and imagine the "homosexual problem" as being a lot bigger and more important than it actually is. If only all the religious groups who protested against homosexuality protested against terrorism and poverty!

Since when is it a "problem" anyway. As far as I am concerned you can do what you wish behind closed doors.

However I do feel that some people tend to take things a little too far with their sexuality. There is no need to make a big deal out of it.

People cannot help living in sin; it's a sin to say that you don't sin. Just because a person doesn't realize the act they have committed at the time was sin, and therefore hadn't repented, doesn't mean they are condemned for it.



That's a little presumptious, in my opinion.



That's exactly right. We could use more christians like you. :)



People are responsible for their own choices and lifestyles; if God is offended by your choices, it's your responsibility to change yourself, not God's. He won't snap his fingers and magically fix you, but he would provide love and support for you to seek the solution on your own.



Exactly. Our purpose as christians is to point the way, nothing more.

You must have missed my point on "living in sin" vs. "being a sinner". All are sinners, but by excepting Jesus and allowing him control over our lives we are not longer in a state of sin, although we are still human and thus still sin.

Sorry to get off topic here, but does this mean that I, as a disabled man, have defiled every church I've ever entered?
What the Bible says about Handicapped People
Lev.21:17-23
Whosoever ... hath any blemish, let him not approach to offer the bread of his God. For whatsoever man he be that hath a blemish, he shall not approach: a blind man, or a lame, or he that hath a flat nose, or any thing superfluous, Or a man that is brokenfooted, or brokenhanded, Or crookbackt, or a dwarf, or that hath a blemish in his eye, or be scurvy, or scabbed, or hath his stones broken; No man that hath a blemish of the seed of Aaron the priest shall come nigh to offer the offerings of the LORD made by fire: he hath a blemish; he shall not come nigh to offer the bread of his God. ... Only he shall not go in unto the vail, nor come nigh unto the altar, because he hath a blemish; that he profane not my sanctuaries.

Don't you think you've got your fair share of "prejudice and hate" in that post?

The difference is that I don't maintain that I am not prejudiced. I don't balme my prejudice on others or that god told me to be this way.

I have come to believe that dedicated atheists like yourself will never come to believe

When did I say i was an atheist? Being an aethiest requires some sort faith that there is no god since god's existence can not be disproved. However to put that in context no one can disprove that the Roman gods don't exist or that we are ruled by invisible super-intelligent slugs that control every aspect of our lives only giving us the illusion of free will. Why is one anymore ridculous than the other when none can be prooved either way. No I am an agnostic with doubts.

I think that just because it's topical today many Christians and Muslims lose their sense and imagine the "homosexual problem" as being a lot bigger and more important than it actually is. If only all the religious groups who protested against homosexuality protested against terrorism and poverty!

True - and how many of these gay-bashing Christians actually MET a homosexual, beyond what they see at their local pride parade that occurs in their town? how many of them have actually SPENT a bit of time talking to a long term gay couple who have spent a good portion of their lives together?

It seems that many Christians are willing to pick up the first stone and give it a damn good throw, but they're unwilling to sit down and rationally challenge and pull apart their own beliefs; and an unwillingness to show some humility and accept that just maybe they got the wrong end of the stick.

So I think that maybe Christianity, and religious people in general need to move away from the song and dance of 'strong beliefs' that they use to justify their arrogance, and just plain well acknowledge that they're scared that there are people out there who offer and alternative point of view, the fact that it challenges their life long held beliefs of where they sit in the universe.

When these people challenge these beliefs, massive amounts of insecurity comes forth as they do their best to shut down those who dare question their belief system - quite frankly, its immature, and damaging to society when these sorts of people are then allowed to have positions power, like we've seen in the current Republican party.

I'm an antiscoial depressed goth who swears too much and listens to Rage Against the Machine a lot.

Are you sure about that? :D Holy Scheiß, we do not need more Christians like that! I should know I am one! :p

And, yeah… I agree with people. I can't remember what the first post was, but I think I agreed with it.

And yet there it is in the bible, so either god screwed up (thus proving that he isn't all-knowing and all-powerful), or it is all just the words of men rather than 'the word of god'

The bible was written 2,000+ years ago by men inspired by god. God did not wave his hand and create the gospel, although that would have been easier.

Text often changes with translation. Try translating something from English to another laguage and back to English like this
http://lowroad75.keenspace.com/d/20051003.html

The people back then did not think the same as us. There was no science, thus everything was god or chance.

Who knows if it was edited? I don't.
Where the bit about Christ as a 20 year old, He goes 12-30 as I remember

Well if there is a God we can only hope that he banishes all the male gays to hell. Nasty people!!!! On the other hand, everyone likes to see two chicks going to town on each other!!! :)

I honestly just think it's funny that the Judeo-Christian bible would say that men couldn't do anything of that sort, but nothing about women doing it. Apparently, gay guys are wrong, but lesbians are perfectly fine. :fluffle:

That's because the people who wrote them are just, well, people. They were influenced by the flawed understanding of the reproductive cycle at that time. Israelites believed that there was a finite amount of seed in a man, so every drop of it should go toward reproducing for the good of the tribe. This leads to all the seemingly nonsensical teachings about sex: masturbation is wrong, since it wastes the seed, male homosexuality is wrong, because it wastes the seed, but female homosexuality is fine, because it doesn't waste anything. By the time Paul started writing, these assertions were taken on dogma alone despite the fact that their basis had already been undermined by improvements in medical understanding.

I'm a Christian and I'm fine with gay people. Most people at my school are and I go to a catholic shcool, so we're not all crazy.

Has it ever occured to anyone that the entire teachings of Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, to a certain extent, Islam, and most major world religions is essentially

"Be a good person, don't do evil things." (by the way, I would think that using civic representative government to repress the rights of other people based on your own code of ethics is evil, or at least morally reprehensible)

As such, religion is an intensely personal thing. Just the same as sexuality. To make a long, preachy sermon short, if you believe that homosexuality is wrong, then by all means screw women. Just don't try to force belief on anyone. Be a better person than that.

"First they came for the gays, and I was silent. Then they came for the mentally retarded and I was silent. Then they came for the Communists, and I was silent. Then they came for the gypsies and I was silent. Then they came for the Jews and I was silent. Then they came for me, and there was noone left to protest."

Quote: from Baran-Duine
Romans 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. {"The natural use of the woman"
Paul explains that "the natural use" of women is to act as sexual objects for the pleasure of men.}

Continuing into verses 28 through 32 we find all sorts and types of things that make a New Testament Christian worthy of death.

Romans 1:29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice;they are gossips,:headbang:

30 slanderers,haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents,:eek:

31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful;:gundge:

32 and, although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.:mad:

Kinda brings a tear to your eyes to read and understand all the love and mercy written in the Book of Jesus. The fact that many of these "pagan temple prostitutes" were slaves and had no choice in who had sex with them is irrelevant. God said they must die. Cum Bayah anyone?:p

Quote: from Baran-Duine
<snip>
Kinda brings a tear to your eyes to read and understand all the love and mercy written in the Book of Jesus. The fact that many of these "pagan temple prostitutes" were slaves and had no choice in who had sex with them is irrelevant. God said they must die. Cum Bayah anyone?:p

One also has to remember that the book of Romans was written by Paul, not Jesus. Apparently Paul was quicker to condemn sinners than Jesus was. Second, I do not see where the temple prostitutes were even mentioned in Romans ch. 1--verses 18-32 pertain to those who know God's specific commands and knowingly break them. I'm posting posting verses 18-21 for conext:

"18 The wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
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."

As such, religion is an intensely personal thing. Just the same as sexuality. To make a long, preachy sermon short, if you believe that homosexuality is wrong, then by all means screw women. Just don't try to force belief on anyone. Be a better person than that.

That's the most oft-ignored concept of christianity. *sighs*

Lev.21:17-23
Whosoever ... hath any blemish, let him not approach to offer the bread of his God. <snip>

That verse is part of a set of Old Testament laws for the tribe of Aaron. It only meant that those who are "blemished" cannot become a priest; it never says that God condemns all the handicapped as impure.

Does that answer your question?

So... the question is have you ever gotten drunk? Or looked at a woman with lust? Do you still get drunk? Do you still look at women and feel the vapors? If so then that either means you're going to hell, or it means that men that have sex with other men still go to the heaven that your religion says is there, additionally since christians typically believe the second part of the bible MUCH more than the first: Jesus had been 'quoted' as saying something along the lines of he "loves the sinner, not the sin". If you're accepted in jesus christ's love, and you're gay, you're still accepted into heaven by those merits.

Gaybashing via the Bible simply seems to be a way of saying all the uncomfortable feelings people sometimes have about homosexuality, and saying that GAWWWD also has said it. There's also a quote in the bible that you shouldn't interpret the verses of the bible for anyone else, that technically makes preachers major sinners as well. I'm not checking this again, rebutt as much as you want.

-SH

Sorry to get off topic here, but does this mean that I, as a disabled man, have defiled every church I've ever entered?
What the Bible says about Handicapped People
Lev.21:17-23
Whosoever ... hath any blemish, let him not approach to offer the bread of his God. For whatsoever man he be that hath a blemish, he shall not approach: a blind man, or a lame, or he that hath a flat nose, or any thing superfluous, Or a man that is brokenfooted, or brokenhanded, Or crookbackt, or a dwarf, or that hath a blemish in his eye, or be scurvy, or scabbed, or hath his stones broken; No man that hath a blemish of the seed of Aaron the priest shall come nigh to offer the offerings of the LORD made by fire: he hath a blemish; he shall not come nigh to offer the bread of his God. ... Only he shall not go in unto the vail, nor come nigh unto the altar, because he hath a blemish; that he profane not my sanctuaries.
Yup, that's what it means. :( Assuming , of course, that you believe any of it, which I don't. :)

And yet there it is in the bible, so either god screwed up (thus proving that he isn't all-knowing and all-powerful), or it is all just the words of men rather than 'the word of god'
The bible was written 2,000+ years ago by men inspired by god. God did not wave his hand and create the gospel, although that would have been easier.

Text often changes with translation. Try translating something from English to another laguage and back to English like this
http://lowroad75.keenspace.com/d/20051003.html

The people back then did not think the same as us. There was no science, thus everything was god or chance.

Who knows if it was edited? I don't.
Where the bit about Christ as a 20 year old, He goes 12-30 as I remember
And, that would be exactly my point. Far too many people accept the bible as 'the word of god' and believe it to be literally true.

Has it ever occured to anyone that the entire teachings of Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, to a certain extent, Islam, and most major world religions is essentially

"Be a good person, don't do evil things." (by the way, I would think that using civic representative government to repress the rights of other people based on your own code of ethics is evil, or at least morally reprehensible)

As such, religion is an intensely personal thing. Just the same as sexuality. To make a long, preachy sermon short, if you believe that homosexuality is wrong, then by all means screw women. Just don't try to force belief on anyone. Be a better person than that.

"First they came for the gays, and I was silent. Then they came for the mentally retarded and I was silent. Then they came for the Communists, and I was silent. Then they came for the gypsies and I was silent. Then they came for the Jews and I was silent. Then they came for me, and there was noone left to protest."

I'm fine with the general message of most modern religions, I just don't like it when they try and force me to live by their self-imposed rules

Yup, that's what it means. :( Assuming , of course, that you believe any of it, which I don't. :)


Kinda makes want to run through a church or synagogue and climb up on the altar wearing a big sign that reads "UNCLEAN"

I'm a Christian and I'm fine with gay people. Most people at my school are and I go to a catholic shcool, so we're not all crazy.
No-one said you were all crazy... at least not out loud ;)

Kinda makes want to run through a church or synagogue and climb up on the altar wearing a big sign that reads "UNCLEAN"
Nah, I'm far too lazy :D good idea though

Synygouge wouldn't care, they know you're unclean, everyone's unclean due to the law about whoever touchs/is near a corpse or someone who's touched a corpse is unclean.
Church also wouldn't care as they've abolished the whole concept of unclean.
You've done absolutly nothing. Feel proud of yourself.

And, that would be exactly my point. Far too many people accept the bible as 'the word of god' and believe it to be literally true.

At the very least it's mostly true. :)

I'm fine with the general message of most modern religions, I just don't like it when they try and force me to live by their self-imposed rules

I perfectly understand that, though in my experience christianity doesn't have that many rules to follow. Accept Jesus as your savior, be a relatively good person, and you're all set to go. :D

Synygouge wouldn't care, they know you're unclean, everyone's unclean due to the law about whoever touchs/is near a corpse or someone who's touched a corpse is unclean.
Church also wouldn't care as they've abolished the whole concept of unclean.
You've done absolutly nothing. Feel proud of yourself.


Aww, c'mon! there's got to be someone I can offend with my mere presence! :D

And incidentally, I'm not entirely sure about the translation of that line about homosexuality in Leviticus.(the one that bans it, not the one that punishes it)
I wonder if the line was meant to say "...If it is an abomination" which would prohibit straight people from having gay sex. I have some doubts about my doubts, though. I do know Hebrew has no if, which would support my theory.(There are ways to say it if you really need to, but usually you get if from context. Same with forms of be in general) Could someone who knows Hebrew better then I do look at that line and tell me if I even have a chance of being right?