Homosexuality: Wrong or Right?

[Taken]

Fads are nothing new …. From:
Apparel to
Footwear to
Slang to
Gadgets to
Decor to
Toys to
TV programing to
Music to
Entertainment to
Bizarre Behaviors to
On and on….

And sadly from newborn, to toddler, to very young children, to youths…. Their eyes and ears are NOT sheltered or protected from the incredible amount of 24-7 influential utter garbage, and in many cases is laughingly encouraged as “entertainment”, by the same who should Be Protecting them.

And to add to the mix, adults by “age”, but not in maturity or wisdom, mimicking teens and young adults in their faddish crazes…

I don’t see homosexuality, as much different, getting caught up in an acceptable behavior (among their immature peers) and getting stuck there. It has exploded to a loud in your face demand to accept their utter ridiculous nonsense…and supposed mature responsible adults, falling for and pandering to their nonsense, to me, is the phenomenon.

 

[BlessedPeace]

For sisters and brothers here who would like to understand how to renounce the serpent that insists David committed the sin of gay Sodomy I suggest this one of many resources that renounce that lie with scriptural proof.

Were David and Jonathan Homosexuals?

unamsanctamcatholicam.blogspot.com

Excerpted:
"...
So, now that we have looked at what the Scriptures say, what can we respond to this? Does this evidence indicate that David and Jonathan had a homosexual relationship?

First, from a simple theological standpoint, we know David was not a homosexual, because Scripture states that David was "a man after God's own heart" (1 Sam. 13:14, Acts 13:22). Since David was a man after God's own heart, and since Scripture also plainly states that "neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals" will inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Cor. 6:9-10), then we can easily infer that David was not a homosexual, especially since he is mentioned in the New Testament as one of the heroes of the faith (Heb. 11:32). How could God be a man after God's own heart if he routinely practiced a sin that is abominable in the eyes of God?

David did commit adultery, of course, so we are not saying that a man after God's own heart cannot sin. But to live in a constant, active homosexual relationship for years, and to express no penitence or sorrow for it, is quite a different matter, just as committing one sin and being sorry is different from abiding in a permanent state of mortal sin. So, while one can be a man after God's own heart and still fall into sin, I think it is not possible to be described by Scripture as "a man after God's own heart" and live in a constant state of sin.

Second, this pro-homosexual interpretation neglects to take into account the Middle Eastern conception of a man's relation to his wife. In the Middle East, a man's primary kinship is with other men, not with his wife. For example, during dinner time, the wife and daughters would set the table, but when it was time to eat, a man, the sons, and if any were invited, the man's friends, would dine together, while the women would depart and dine separately or after the men."

 

[BlessedPeace]

Fads are nothing new …. From:
Apparel to
Footwear to
Slang to
Gadgets to
Decor to
Toys to
TV programing to
Music to
Entertainment to
Bizarre Behaviors to
On and on….

And sadly from newborn, to toddler, to very young children, to youths…. Their eyes and ears are NOT sheltered or protected from the incredible amount of 24-7 influential utter garbage, and in many cases is laughingly encouraged as “entertainment”, by the same who should Be Protecting them.

And to add to the mix, adults by “age”, but not in maturity or wisdom, mimicking teens and young adults in their faddish crazes…

I don’t see homosexuality, as much different, getting caught up in an acceptable behavior (among their immature peers) and getting stuck there. It has exploded to a loud in your face demand to accept their utter ridiculous nonsense…and supposed mature responsible adults, falling for and pandering to their nonsense, to me, is the phenomenon.

I suggest a male with an erection who penetrates the rectum of another male, is not one who is engaging in a fad.

The sin of gay sodomy is centuries old. Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed due to their many sins and near total lack of righteousness.

The men were so depraved they gathered together and demanded Lot bring his two male guests,angels unbeknownst to them, so that the men of the town could "know" (sex) them.

And Lot wasn't actually righteous in that he offered his daughters to be gang raped by the gay townsfolk if they'd leave his guests alone. He was righteous enough for God though.


Those who make excuses for gay sin will always be in error.

 

[GracePeace]

I suggest a male with an erection who penetrates the rectum of another male, is not one who is engaging in a fad.

The sin of gay sodomy is centuries old. Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed due to their many sins and near total lack of righteousness.

The men were so depraved they gathered together and demanded Lot bring his two male guests,angels unbeknownst to them, so that the men of the town could "know" (sex) them.

And Lot wasn't actually righteous in that he offered his daughters to be gang raped by the gay townsfolk if they'd leave his guests alone. He was righteous enough for God though.


Those who make excuses for gay sin will always be in error.

I think he means the fad of "gay christianity".

 

[BlessedPeace]

I think he means the fad of "gay christianity".

Yes,perhaps. However,within that sect are those,as in the example of one who posted earlier, who insist gay sex in a relationship is not condemned by God.


When premarital sex between heterosexuals is condemned in the Bible,the gay sex defense has zero credibility when claimed to be supported by scripture. And scripture.

 

[Taken]

I suggest a male with an erection who penetrates the rectum of another male, is not one who is engaging in a fad.

The sin of gay sodomy is centuries old. Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed due to their many sins and near total lack of righteousness.

The men were so depraved they gathered together and demanded Lot bring his two male guests,angels unbeknownst to them, so that the men of the town could "know" (sex) them.

And Lot wasn't actually righteous in that he offered his daughters to be gang raped by the gay townsfolk if they'd leave his guests alone. He was righteous enough for God though.

Agree homosexual behavior is centuries old and no more right then as now.

Those who make excuses for gay sin will always be in error.

IMO, Recognizing the many facets of why one chooses the path of homosexuality, historically or modernly; does not equate to excusing or condoning as you suggest.

 

[Traveler]

I am so sick of this pushing the gay agenda. It is like King Rat pontificating from the sewer that the sludge from the bottom of the septic tank smells like roses and all have to be forced to agree. The only reason the gay agenda is being pushed is because it is a weapon formed to isolate the religious conservatives because this is something they cannot accept.

There is no moral high ground for the gays and this whole hater synology is not going to work. What is wrong is wrong and the spin off results from this whole debarckel is already starting to show. Only bad is going to come out of this.

Tell me, how many gays do you expect to see as citizens in the kingdom of heaven ? If they are not there then where are they going to be. Snap out of it ! Forgiveness and repentance go hand in hand, there cannot be one without the other. Christs blood is not there for those who deliberately want to disregard Gods laws and practice their sins even if they try to coherse others to follow them down the path of damnation. All this is going to do is bring judgment upon the nation and here we stand on the brink of WW3. Once that hits there is no going back.

 

[Behold]

Many false teachings here.
God condemns all homosexual sex acts.
Those who claim otherwise could be gay. Though that is no excuse. They approve and or judge pardonable what God judges as abomination.
And God would not approve.

 

[BlessedPeace]

Agree homosexual behavior is centuries old and no more right then as now.



IMO, Recognizing the many facets of why one chooses the path of homosexuality, historically or modernly; does not equate to excusing or condoning as you suggest.

My post directly addressed someone here doing just that. Excusing gay sex and insisting there are no scripture that condemns gay sex relationship.

 

[Behold]

Your reply is typical of your nasty spirit! You attack the doctrines of Augustine,

Let me be clear..

It would be impossible for me to care less, regarding what "Cult of the Virgin" "dark ages" Catholicism taught you to try to teach as your cult doctrine.

I get my Theology from Jesus, who gave it to PAUL.
That's my bottom line, and it'll never change, as that is what the NT tells all the born again, to do.

And im not describing water baptized religious fakirs.

I said REAL Born again = CHRISTians.

Also, its not being "nasty" to expose a forum member's comments, that do not reflect God's stated point of veiw regarding ""Gay sex acts", as YOUR definition of "LOVE">

= Homosexuality, is not LOVE...ITs perverted "same gender" "unnatural sex acts" condemned by God, and Paul, and the NT, and the OT.

@Arthur81 .. if you own a Bible, then simply read Genesis 19, where God dealt with A city full of Homosexuals, (Sodomites) who wanted to Rape (Gay Love) = 2 of God's Angels.

Get God's viewpoint, clearly provided, by that actual situation, as it did happen.

And one moe....Its teaching NT Truth to state that "homosexuality" is an unnatural sexuality, and its condemned by God as being immoral, perverted, and nothing less.

 

[Taken]

My post directly addressed someone here doing just that. Excusing gay sex and insisting there are no scripture that condemns gay sex relationship.

Okay…I will presume discreetness, not to or about me personally.

God Bless you.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[BlessedPeace]

Okay…I will presume discreetness, not to or about me personally.

God Bless you.

Glory to God,
Taken

Goodness,why would you think my post was regarding you? Arthur is the one who my post referred to as one who makes the claim.

 

[Arthur81]

Where in the Bible do you find that it approves of pre-marital sex or same sex marriage?
Since you say it doesn’t condemn a loving relationship between two adults of the same sex do you mean outside of marriage?
I haven’t read the whole thread so I apologize if you have already answered these questions.

I do not discuss marriage in this context because biblical marriage is ONLY man to woman, not man to man. To bring in questions like "pre-marital" or use like "fornication" or "adultery" in a M-M context when the Bible never uses those heterosexual sins of heterosexuals in the context of M-M. The condemnations of M-M sex in the Bible are against rape, abusiveness, in connection with idolatry. The only relationships that can fit a M-M relationship of love and physical intimacy is in the following:

"Here again I saw futility under the sun: someone without a friend, without son or brother, toiling endlessly yet never satisfied with his wealth—‘For whom’, he asks, ‘am I toiling and denying myself the good things of life?’ This too is futile, a worthless task. Two are better than one, for their partnership yields this advantage: if one falls, the other can help his companion up again; but woe betide the solitary person who when down has no partner to help him up. And if two lie side by side they keep each other warm; but how can one keep warm by himself? If anyone is alone, an assailant may overpower him, but two can resist; and a cord of three strands is not quickly snapped." (Eccl 4:7-12 REB)

To bring in words relating to marriage is to give support for the LGBTQ+ push for gay marriage. I'm not saying the life for the born again man of God who is gay is easy, but the churches have certainly given no help whatsoever.

 

[Arthur81]

Last night I watched a comedy routine "You know you're a redneck if....". I'll write "You know you're a religious homophobic bigot if..."

1. You think "sodomite" means the same thing, and is synonymous with "homosexual".
2. You think rape or attempted rape is sin because it is M-M, and that condemns all M-M sex.
3. You think being exclusively or predominantly homosexually oriented is a choice
4. You think anyone who opposes the homophobia in the church must be gay
5. You think you can use words like "pre-marital" regarding gays, but then oppose gay marriage
6. You think you can reject the older translations showing 1 Cor. 6:9 & 1 Tim. 1:10 are sodomites
7. You believe non-gays don't sometimes engage in gay behavior
8. You ignore that David was a man after God's own heart in spite of David's having 10 wives, yet David and Jonathan?
9. You believe that all gays engage in anal intercourse instead of other forms of physical expression
10. You use uncertain or questionable translations as doctrinal support for homophobia
11. You ignore that Leviticus was written to and for Israel alone Lev. 26:46; 27:34
12. You ignore that Ezekiel 16:48-50, Wisdom 19:14-17, and Sirach 16:8 do not list "homosexuality" as a sin of Sodom
13. You ignore what the old Bibles like the KJV mean, as the 1828 Webster's Defines those English words

Regarding both 1 Cor. 6:9 and 1 Tim. 1:10, from the 1828 Webster's -

ABU'SER, n. s as z. One who abuses, in speech or behavior; one that deceives; a ravisher; a sodomite. 1 Cor 6.

RAV'ISHER, n.
1. One that takes by violence. 2. One that forces a woman to his carnal embrace.

DEFILE, v.t.
5. To corrupt chastity; to debauch; to violate; to tarnish the purity of character by lewdness.
Schechem defiled Dinah. Gen 34. *Read Genesis 34 and you see it is about rape

The 1946 RSV in a misleading translation used "homosexuals" in 1 Cor. 6:9 and "sodomites" in 1 Tim. 1:10. First, homosexual and sodomite are NOT synonymous; Second the word and concept in homosexuality never existed until the end of the 19th century. The RSV Revised Edition removed the word "homosexuals" and it has not been used in that line of translations since. The traditional translations as in the KJV, RV, ASV, YLT, etc. use the dynamic description, or the word "sodomites"; NOT homosexuals or practicing homosexuals.

 

[RLT63]

Last night I watched a comedy routine "You know you're a redneck if....". I'll write "You know you're a religious homophobic bigot if..."

1. You think "sodomite" means the same thing, and is synonymous with "homosexual".
2. You think rape or attempted rape is sin because it is M-M, and that condemns all M-M sex.
3. You think being exclusively or predominantly homosexually oriented is a choice
4. You think anyone who opposes the homophobia in the church must be gay
5. You think you can use words like "pre-marital" regarding gays, but then oppose gay marriage
6. You think you can reject the older translations showing 1 Cor. 6:9 & 1 Tim. 1:10 are sodomites
7. You believe non-gays don't sometimes engage in gay behavior
8. You ignore that David was a man after God's own heart in spite of David's having 10 wives, yet David and Jonathan?
9. You believe that all gays engage in anal intercourse instead of other forms of physical expression
10. You use uncertain or questionable translations as doctrinal support for homophobia
11. You ignore that Leviticus was written to and for Israel alone Lev. 26:46; 27:34
12. You ignore that Ezekiel 16:48-50, Wisdom 19:14-17, and Sirach 16:8 do not list "homosexuality" as a sin of Sodom
13. You ignore what the old Bibles like the KJV mean, as the 1828 Webster's Defines those English words

Regarding both 1 Cor. 6:9 and 1 Tim. 1:10, from the 1828 Webster's -

ABU'SER, n. s as z. One who abuses, in speech or behavior; one that deceives; a ravisher; a sodomite. 1 Cor 6.

RAV'ISHER, n.
1. One that takes by violence. 2. One that forces a woman to his carnal embrace.

DEFILE, v.t.
5. To corrupt chastity; to debauch; to violate; to tarnish the purity of character by lewdness.
Schechem defiled Dinah. Gen 34. *Read Genesis 34 and you see it is about rape

The 1946 RSV in a misleading translation used "homosexuals" in 1 Cor. 6:9 and "sodomites" in 1 Tim. 1:10. First, homosexual and sodomite are NOT synonymous; Second the word and concept in homosexuality never existed until the end of the 19th century. The RSV Revised Edition removed the word "homosexuals" and it has not been used in that line of translations since. The traditional translations as in the KJV, RV, ASV, YLT, etc. use the dynamic description, or the word "sodomites"; NOT homosexuals or practicing homosexuals.

So what is a sodomite?

 

[RLT63]

I do not discuss marriage in this context because biblical marriage is ONLY man to woman, not man to man. To bring in questions like "pre-marital" or use like "fornication" or "adultery" in a M-M context when the Bible never uses those heterosexual sins of heterosexuals in the context of M-M. The condemnations of M-M sex in the Bible are against rape, abusiveness, in connection with idolatry. The only relationships that can fit a M-M relationship of love and physical intimacy is in the following:

"Here again I saw futility under the sun: someone without a friend, without son or brother, toiling endlessly yet never satisfied with his wealth—‘For whom’, he asks, ‘am I toiling and denying myself the good things of life?’ This too is futile, a worthless task. Two are better than one, for their partnership yields this advantage: if one falls, the other can help his companion up again; but woe betide the solitary person who when down has no partner to help him up. And if two lie side by side they keep each other warm; but how can one keep warm by himself? If anyone is alone, an assailant may overpower him, but two can resist; and a cord of three strands is not quickly snapped." (Eccl 4:7-12 REB)

To bring in words relating to marriage is to give support for the LGBTQ+ push for gay marriage. I'm not saying the life for the born again man of God who is gay is easy, but the churches have certainly given no help whatsoever.

The only sex life for a gay man who is born again is celibacy

 

[Arthur81]

The only sex life for a gay man who is born again is celibacy

The Holy Spirit has informed you that every and each gay man has the "GIFT" of celibacy?

"For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that. I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I. But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn." (1Cor 7:7-9 KJV)

The definition of a homosexual male is one who desires not only love and companionship of another male, but also desires the sexual expression of that love and companionship. According to Jesus, if the act that physical expression/act of love is sin, then the desire for it is sin. Enforced celibacy for one who is gay does not avoid sin!

"Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart." (Matt 5:27-28 KJV) *The Greek translated lust here is "desire".

 

[Arthur81]

So what is a sodomite?

Open your eyes and read how the 1828 Webster's defines the KJV words as I recorded in my posts. You can also get a hint from what it means for one to "sodomize" another person. That is the act of a sodomite.

Go to the Merriam-Webster and read about standard English versus offensive language -

"sodomite often offensive : someone who practices sodomy —>used as a term of abuse and disparagement for a gay person"

Definition of SODOMITE

someone who practices sodomy —used as a term of abuse and disparagement for a gay person… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

For someone to use "sodomite" in reference to a gay, is to show oneself to be an ignorant abusive bigot.

 

[BlessedPeace]

The only sex life for a gay man who is born again is celibacy

You and the rest of us might want to take notice. It is fruitless to argue with someone who refuses to respect God's word because he objects to being condemned as an unrepentant homosexual.
Gay males in relationship are not approved by God in their sinful behavior.

sodomy/sŏd′ə-mē/​

noun​

1. Any of various forms of sexual acts regarded as perverted, especially anal intercourse, oral-anal contact, or sexual intercourse with an animal.
2. Carnal copulation in a manner against nature; buggery.
   Similar: buggery
3. Immorality in general.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition • More at Wordnik

 

[GracePeace]

The Holy Spirit has informed you that every and each gay man has the "GIFT" of celibacy?

"For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that. I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I. But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn." (1Cor 7:7-9 KJV)

Oops, you forgot the instruction he had already given on the matter:

1 Corinthians 7
1Now concerning the things about which you wrote, it is good for a man not to touch a woman. 2But because of immoralities, each man is to have his own wife, and each woman is to have her own husband.

Each man is to have his own wife, and each woman is to have her own husband--no space is given for abominations!
I'm sure this was an "honest" "mistake" on your part, you devil, twisting God's Words around like your father satan tried to do to Jesus--but, as with Jesus, also, now, your blasphemous error is laid bare.

The definition of a homosexual male is one who desires not only love and companionship of another male, but also desires the sexual expression of that love and companionship. According to Jesus, if the act that physical expression/act of love is sin, then the desire for it is sin. Enforced celibacy for one who is gay does not avoid sin!

Christ commanded, "Deny yourself, take up your Cross, and follow Me"--the one who is attracted to the opposite sex must deny himself all of the time, and the person who is attracted to the same sex, if he is to follow Christ, must deny himself, and if he is "unsatisfied" with Christ, and must blaspheme Christ by committing abominable anti-natural acts that Christ hates to find "satisfaction", then he's not following Christ at all!

"Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart." (Matt 5:27-28 KJV) *The Greek translated lust here is "desire".

This is idiotic. You don't think there's a difference at all between thinking and actually doing?
Of course there is!
If someone hates someone, they are guilty of murder before God, but the person who is being hated's loved ones are not harmed by him actually being murdered--there is a difference between the thought and the act! As always, you do not know God's Word, and you are a serial liar (you pick out lies to tell against God's Word to try to change Christianity, and take God's people out from His Truth and standards, thus destroy and murder them, you wicked son of the devil).