Homosexuality

[Foreigner]

The thing I love about some Christians is their unabashed humility (sarcasm). Seriously, they actually believe that as long as they carry and can quote from the Bible that they actually become the mouth-piece for a Being who is purported to have created everything.

-- So you are basically calling null and void anything God has shared with us via the Bible. While it is convenient for you, that doesn't make you any less wrong.

"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness" - 2 Tim. 3:16

Am simply curious...
If you are not going to accept scripture, then why do you always demand that people provide it for you?

That's EVERYTHING! How do YOU know, Foreigner, what is and what is not acceptable to God?

-- It's called the Bible. One of the primary reasons He gave it to us is so that we will know what is and what isn't acceptable to Him.
Sorry you don't get that. Hopefully it will dawn on you before you find yourself standing before Him.

Please tell me because I tell you in all honesty that "I" could never speak for someone that I cannot relate to. Jesus, yes ...I can relate to Jesus. God, no ...I cannot relate to God and, unlike some, I don't pretend that I can.

-- And therein lies your problem. You don't seem to understand that Jesus IS God.

As above. You don't know what 'God's word' is on ANY issue unless God has spoken to you personally.

-- He has. Through His Word.
Hate to break it to you, but just because He hasn't spoken to YOU through His Word, that doesn't mean He doesn't do it.

By the way, I'm still waiting to hear from someone where 'God' says anything about 'the homosexual act' per se.

-- Why would anyone bother to try to help you understand?
If you are shown in Leviticus where God warns against a man laying with a man as he does with a woman, you will say that is the O.T. is no longer valid.
If you are shown in Corinthians were it says "men who practice homosexuality" will not inheret the kingdom of God, you will poo poo the translation or claim it is out of context or you just know in your heart that is not what God meant.

What it comes down to is that God's Word is not good enough for you. Kind of makes it hard to take you seriously.

Not worried about it even slightly, because its trival, I can even seeing God getting a good chuckle over that people fear being rejected over their sexuality, even heterosexual activity done with another consenting adult. Some dare not depart from the missionary position out of concern that everything else is 'deviant sex'. In part, it really comes down to is the glass half full, or half empty perspective of God's intent. Those who have the half-empty perspective fear God, those who have the half-full outlook, do not.

-- Again, using your standard, then God's blessing on sexual activity cannot be restricted to between two adults can it?
If His Scripture is not good enough to condemn sex outside of marraige, sex between two people who are married but not to each other, or homosexual sex, then it can't be used to condemn any other sexual activity with willful partners, can it?

That means that if three or four people feel true love for one another, then sexual activity between then all at one time couldn't possibly be wrong, correct?
Because if God's word isn't good enough for you, and man's law doesn't oppose it, God's will obviously "get a good chuckle" over those who condemn it.....right?

That means that a minor who feels ready for sex who consents to an adult is something God will "get a good chuckle" over people condemning.
After all, God doesn't give a specific age limit, does He. That of course means He doesn't feel there is one, right?

And if a Brother and Sister or Father and Daughter or Mother and Son wish to show love for one another by having sex and are careful not to get pregnant, God will "get a good chuckle" over those who say that is wrong, as well. After all, they obviously love each other and incest occured in the O.T., right?

And then it can't be restricted to two humans, either. If a man wants to have sex with an animal or a woman wants to submit her body to an animal, God will "get a good chuckle" out of those who oppose that, too.
Who cares that he spoke against this specifically in the O.T. If the animal and the human both willfully participate, what's the problem here?

And you can't say God opposes because it is against human law.
If people change the laws to accept these things as they are doing with Gay Marraige, then God really isn't going to be bothered by it then, is He?


Don't worry Kid, I know you can't answer this so you will dodge or obfuscate.

I still have hope that Jack will at least attempt a reasonable answer, though...

 

[marksman]

It's YOU that is calling those with Masters and PhDs in sociology, psychiatry and psychology QUACKS. Make up your mind. What I DID say is that homosexuals are those who can speak for themselves without having a so-called 'expert mouth-piece' speak for them.

Can they? If that is the case, why do the pink mafia insist that no one can stop being homosexual and if you think you can, you are totally deluded. Why are they doing all they can to make it illegal to help people who do not want to be homosexual? Why are people who were homosexual and no longer are put down, insulted and derided by the pink mafia?

Reality and fiction are often far apart in the world of homosexuality and the pink mafia want to keep it that way to prevent the truth from getting a hold.

Some poster stated that homosexuality is a choice as if their merely saying it actually made it so. And so, I gave the officially recognized position of the APA. No other reason.

One can defend their position until they are blue in the face, but it doesn't make it the truth because that is what they believe but there is one thing for sure and that is whether you say it or not, homosexuality is a choice for the reasons I stated and for the reasons that have been stated by many people who are experts in the field.

And for the reasons I stated, the APA position changes like the weather and you believing otherwise does not change that fact. And I was not aware that God wrote the charter of the APA in regards to homosexuality, so I will stick to what he did write which is very clear in scriptures.

??? So, on the one hand you're basically calling 'quacks' those whose official position is that homosexuality is something that one has little to no control over and on the other hand you've set YOURSELF up as some expert on the subject by claiming that homosexuals are NOT born 'that way' . . .! Who are we to believe, medical science or you . . .?

In your haste to demonise me, you have put words into my mouth. I DID NOT call anyone quacks EXCEPT the APA who a previous President said they had ditched scientific rigour for politically correct ideology. What is there about that statement don't you understand?

Moreover - and I'm really calling you out on this! - not only are you implying that homosexuals are really 'deviant heterosexuals' (an unbelievably stupid thing to imply) but they are - according to you - LIARS to boot!

You are wasting your time on this because I never said either. That is the spin you have put on it because you have no evidence to the contrary.

You really don't like homosexuals do you?

No of course not, that is why I responded to God's call to start a support group for them; allowed them into my home and play with my children; made myself available to them 24/7; and why some of them said they wished I was their Dad. People who do not like homosexuals do this sort of thing all the time and please forgive the sarcasm as your remark is quite ridiculous.

You can like or dislike whoever you choose but please don't denean them publicly and - MOST IMPORTANT - don't use the name of Jesus to support you in this!

I don't demean them publicly as most of my comment is about homosexuality, not individual homosexuals. The day I take advice from someone like you and ignore what is taught by God and his word is the day that I stop being a Christian.

I ALWAYS use the name of Jesus because we are told to in scripture if it means that someone is going to be set free from bondage. Homosexuality is a bondage so I have full authority from God and scripture to use the name of Jesus to free people from it.

Excuse me?? Have you been reading this thread?

Yes.

Have you been absent from the world for the last couple of decades?

No.

Are you really not aware as to how this issue (homosexuality) has created angst and division within the Christian Church?

Yes.

Have you not heard of Matthew Shepard who was beaten to death for being gay?

Yes.

Have you not heard of the Westboro Baptist Church who 'real' Christians claim to distance themselves from but, deep down, agree with them, scripturally speaking?

Yes.

There are very few Christians who publicly come out to defend homosexuals, not against the wrath of God, but from the wrath of Christians! I will never again set foot in a Church that is unified through its homophobic preaching!

No one is asking you to.

I have YET to see empirical evidence of just a handful - let alone 'thousands' - of former homosexuals.

That is what the pink mafia say when trying to deny the truth. If they haven't seen it, then it doesn't exist which means "I know what you say is the truth but I cannot admit to the fact or we are in trouble. "

 

[KCKID]

You are not a new creation / Christian? Non Christians have an excuse, Christians, should know better.

I know better now than I did 5 years ago. Why? Because I've had 5 year's growth as a Christian during which time I've become more enlightened about the scriptures than I ever was the previous 17 years.

We cannot in the slightest judge non-Christians. You are mixing the two together...?? :blink:

So, what you're saying is that it's okay to judge fellow Christians ...?

You know of Christians that support GLBT's.

Sure, heaps. I'll post a list of all the churches here in Australia that support GLBT's if you like. I guess you'll say that the members of these churches cannot possibly be Christians . . .?

 

[mjrhealth]

Its a strange thing, you know, Christ refers to His Eclesia as His bride (feminine) and the harlot, mans church is also feminine, therefore all those christians who are in mans church with the harlot are not only being unfaithfull to there bridegroom but doing what is un natural and his bride is sleeping with a woman. Makes you wonder doesnt it ??

In all his love

 

[JackSafari]

??

Homosexuals are no more 'wicked' than are heterosexuals. While I accept that Jesus came to remove our sins and impute them to Himself I do NOT accept that Jesus removed our ability to use our brains with which to reason things out for ourselves. While I may be taken to task for saying this I find it quite pathetic that people use scriptures with which to make their argument, scriptures with which, if we are honest, can be used against ANYONE one chooses.

I agree. My life experience has shown me that people of all faiths use their religious book of god to justify what they personally feel is right or wrong. Pick nearly any debatable topic, and people will quote their favorite text to justify\rationalize their beliefs and actions, even if what they do causes harm to others. Racists find scriptures to support racism, so does that make them right, clearly they thinks so, or does that simply mean they seek to justify their actions\ beliefs through their religious faith. Same with homosexuality, the bible is used to justify homophobic beliefs, just like it has been used for 2000 years to justify all kinds of horrible persecutions and religious crusades. The fact its not just limited to Christianity indicated its human ignorance that is the source of the problem, not so much what is written in a religious book.

 

[JB_Reformed Baptist]

The thing I love about some Christians is their unabashed humility (sarcasm). Seriously, they actually believe that as long as they carry and can quote from the Bible that they actually become the mouth-piece for a Being who is purported to have created everything. That's EVERYTHING! How do YOU know, Foreigner, what is and what is not acceptable to God? Please tell me because I tell you in all honesty that "I" could never speak for someone that I cannot relate to. Jesus, yes ...I can relate to Jesus. God, no ...I cannot relate to God and, unlike some, I don't pretend that I can.


As above. You don't know what 'God's word' is on ANY issue unless God has spoken to you personally. Besides, you're speaking for robots, Foreigner, which, sadly, too many people are or, at least, certainly act that way. However, human beings are NOT robots and were never designed to be. Repeat: Human beings are NOT robots and were never designed to be. Humans have been designed to act on their own behalf - not even on God's behalf - and that rather implies that they have free will (though that IS debatable). Heterosexuals have the free will to couple up with those to whom they are attracted. Heterosexuals also have the free will to pair up with those to whom they are attracted. This does not make either heterosexuals or homosexuals 'wicked' people. YOU, through 'the word of God' as you see it, are denying humans free will. You want robots that are programmed to respond mechanically as per 'a manual'. Even then, you are interpreting the manual to follow your own line of thinking.

By the way, I'm still waiting to hear from someone where 'God' says anything about 'the homosexual act' per se. That is, any homosexual act that is NOT associated with the worship of false idols. I believe that no such scripture exists but I'm right here to be proven wrong if anyone can do so.

Are you a 'homosexual apologist'?

??

Homosexuals are no more 'wicked' than are heterosexuals. While I accept that Jesus came to remove our sins and impute them to Himself I do NOT accept that Jesus removed our ability to use our brains with which to reason things out for ourselves. While I may be taken to task for saying this I find it quite pathetic that people use scriptures with which to make their argument, scriptures with which, if we are honest, can be used against ANYONE one chooses.

??

Homosexuals are no more 'wicked' than are heterosexuals. While I accept that Jesus came to remove our sins and impute them to Himself I do NOT accept that Jesus removed our ability to use our brains with which to reason things out for ourselves. While I may be taken to task for saying this I find it quite pathetic that people use scriptures with which to make their argument, scriptures with which, if we are honest, can be used against ANYONE one chooses.

True. But this thread is about homosexuality. So, take it easy, and pour yourself a drink.

 

[JackSafari]

>> That means that a minor who feels ready for sex who consents to an adult is something God will "get a good chuckle" over people condemning.
>> After all, God doesn't give a specific age limit, does He. That of course means He doesn't feel there is one, right?

Seducing children, having sex with children, should not be part of is part of this discussion about what consenting adults decide to do privately. Its an very old\bad argument to imply directly\indirectly that homosexuality leads people to sexually abuse children (or the mentally disabled).

Otherwise, IMHO, God is not concerned with the sexual activities between consenting adults.

 

[SilenceInMotion]

Its an very old\bad argument to imply directly\indirectly that
homosexuality leads people to sexually abuse children (or the mentally
disabled).

Some clergy in the Catholic Church have put forth a notion that hmosexuality may actually be a huge factor. Of course, because of the world's embarrassingly dependant state of political correctness, it is all put straight to the chopping block.

The fact is that most of the priests who committed molestation did it to boys. They are molestors, but most of them *happen* to be gay as well. The position of priest is applicable to a lot of gays because most do not or can not get married. If they alaso happen to have a predatory bone in them, they also have the benefit of being a trusted person with children.

It is not a coincidence that of all positions in this wide world, priesthood has become the alpha position for homosexual molesters. The church has issued this to the public, but instead of the public paying attention and thinking rationally, they want to demonize the Chistendom. Heck, they even call NOT allowing a homosexual into the clergy as being prejudice.

 

[KCKID]

Are you a 'homosexual apologist'?

That's a term I would never have thought to apply to myself but ...perhaps I am. I defend the position of homosexuals to be 'who they are' and to be left alone. The last thing they want is to be hampered by Christians slapping them around the head with a book of commands that none of them keep anyway. The most blatant hypocrites I know - and yes, I'm one of them - are Christians. ANY oppressed people will eventually reach the point where they rise up and make a stand for themselves. This is what we see today with homosexuality and, often, this may be expressed in the form of Gay Mardi Gras which might, to some, be seen as blatant vulgarity. And, it often is. But, what they are really doing, I believe, is giving Christianity 'the finger'. Not necessarily God or Jesus, mind, but 'Christianity'. While I don't really have an interest one way or the other with Gay Mardi Gras I CAN understand why the participants would feel the way they do about those who would still oppress them and send them 'back to the closet' if they had their way. I only hope and pray that the rift between homosexuality and the Christian Church does not eventually lead to all-out war. And, that could happen!

Some clergy in the Catholic Church have put forth a notion that hmosexuality may actually be a huge factor. Of course, because of the world's embarrassingly dependant state of political correctness, it is all put straight to the chopping block.

The fact is that most of the priests who committed molestation did it to boys. They are molestors, but most of them *happen* to be gay as well. The position of priest is applicable to a lot of gays because most do not or can not get married. If they alaso happen to have a predatory bone in them, they also have the benefit of being a trusted person with children.

It is not a coincidence that of all positions in this wide world, priesthood has become the alpha position for homosexual molesters. The church has issued this to the public, but instead of the public paying attention and thinking rationally, they want to demonize the Chistendom. Heck, they even call NOT allowing a homosexual into the clergy as being prejudice.

Christendom doesn't need any help to 'demonize' it, as you say. It's doing a fine job of doing that all by itself. Double standards and good old fashioned hypocrisy make the Church an easy target for its opponents. Christianity isn't seen these days for its supposed core values of caring for the sick, the unloved, the unlovely, the incarcerated, etc. etc. All it seems to do these days is to condemn the world and parrot long and loudly what appears to be its favorite word ...SIN! SIN! SIN! I've never in my life seen and heard so much parodying of Christianity (and therefore God and Jesus) on TV and by the general public as I see and hear today. The Church is in a crisis and either needs to change dramatically and quickly or die. I don't want to see that happen.

>> That means that a minor who feels ready for sex who consents to an adult is something God will "get a good chuckle" over people condemning.
>> After all, God doesn't give a specific age limit, does He. That of course means He doesn't feel there is one, right?

Seducing children, having sex with children, should not be part of is part of this discussion about what consenting adults decide to do privately. Its an very old\bad argument to imply directly\indirectly that homosexuality leads people to sexually abuse children (or the mentally disabled).

Otherwise, IMHO, God is not concerned with the sexual activities between consenting adults.

You know, I occasionally relax on the patio on a clear night (we get a LOT of such nights here in Townsville) either alone or with a friend and we look at the night sky in awe and speak of the wonders of this endless cosmos that we see spread out before us. The mind boggles at the thought that even the closest objects other than the planets are trillions and trillions of miles away. And, we attribute all of those boundless universes that stretch on forever and ever and ever to a Creator, known in the Bible as 'God'. And yet, we have trivialized this Creator God to be no more than a small-minded, snivelling, wimpy version of US! That such a Being who defies any attempt to even BEGIN to describe Him would be in the least bit concerned as to who is being intimate with whom is surely doing such an Almighty God a serious injustice! Why others can't see this is almost as mind-boggling to me as are the wonders of space. I actually find it embarrassing that Christians have such a pathetic mindset of God.

 

[marksman]

Sure, heaps. I'll post a list of all the churches here in Australia that support GLBT's if you like. I guess you'll say that the members of these churches cannot possibly be Christians . . .?

Yes I would like to see that.

By the way, I'm still waiting to hear from someone where 'God' says anything about 'the homosexual act' per se. That is, any homosexual act that is NOT associated with the worship of false idols. I believe that no such scripture exists but I'm right here to be proven wrong if anyone can do so.

I can prove you wrong but you won't accept it unless you understand theological exegesis which I have a feeling you don't judging by your comments so far including this one.

One. A homosexual act IS to worship false idols as it is worshiping the creature rather than the creator as the scripture says.

Two. In Genesis 2:24 God said a man will leave his mother and father and cleave to his WIFE and become one flesh. It does not say to his wife or his boyfriend or girlfriend or his mother etc.

This means that God set down only one relationship that a man was meant for from the beginning of time and there is nothing at all in scripture that shows this has been changed or altered.

Three. Jesus confirmed the everlasting nature of this relationship when he quoted Genesis 2:24. In other words he was confirming and agreeing with what his Father said.

All told there are 770 verses that relate to marriage and not one refers to anything other than a man and a woman. This shows quite clearly there is no place for homosexuality in God's plan for society. if there was, he had 770 verses to say so, but he didn't.

In case you can't grasp these concepts let me put it this way. I give my Son $10,000 and say to him "Go and buy me a Holden Commodore." In saying that, I have said don't buy me a Ford Falcon, even though I didn't say it.

If he could buy me a Commodore, a Falcon or any car I would have said to him "go and buy me a car"

God did not say "go buy me a car." He said "go buy me a Commodore" so he doesn't want you buying a Falcon.

Translating that back to scripture God said 770 times marriage is about male and female so that means it is not about male and male.

In addition when you read all of scripture, you will find ALL sex outside of marriage is forbidden because God has created us emotionally and physically only for the one expression of sex, and that is man and woman in the context of marriage.

He did not create sex just for the sake of it. It had a very specific purpose when God said, "go forth and multiply." That is the reason why God only recognises and blesses sex in the context of marriage as to bring a child into the world in any other configuration is child abuse.

And to add that the pink mafia are quite wrong when they claim that Christians are against homosexuals gaining equality in marriage which they can't as they cannot go forth and multiply. What we are standing up for is God's plan and purpose for all of us and that is every child has the right to a mother and father.

So that means adultery, fornication, bestiality, adult/child sex, sibling sex, familial sex, perverted sex are all off limits regardless of gender and who it is with.

 

[SilenceInMotion]

Christendom doesn't need any help to 'demonize' it, as you say. It's doing a fine job of doing that all by
itself.

There's nothing wrong with the Church. People just try to find ways to demonize it. There are billions of people quite content with the Church, and the Church is content with it's standing. Those such as yourself demonize it, just like what you have posted, and when closely examined, is found to be nothing but tripe.

Double standards and good old fashioned hypocrisy make the
Church an easy target for its opponents.

The double standard, or outright lie really, is calling homosexuality okay when your holy book says it isn't. Sayign there ar eo bad consequences of homosexuality is ridiculous as well. People who crave abnormal sex, well, they crave abnormal sex. They aren't exactly cut from a different cloth, but society tries so hard, and in vain, to deny that.

The Church is an easy target because it is the face of Christianity. Always has been, always will. If it didn't exist, you'd be the target. In fact, yo are the target, and your way of dealing with it is calling evil good. Way to go.

Christianity isn't seen these
days for its supposed core values of caring for the sick, the unloved,
the unlovely, the incarcerated, etc. etc. All it seems to do these days
is to condemn the world and parrot long and loudly what appears to be
its favorite word ...SIN! SIN! SIN!

The world doesn't know what's good for it. The day it abandoned God was the day it turned into vanity. Condmenation and simply stating that something is a sin are two different things. All people seem to do today is not discern that difference. At all. People sit there and ask a question, and when it's ansered, they cry 'bigot'. Hellishly self-righteous. You might want to reinterpret what hypocricy means.

The Church is in a
crisis and either needs to change dramatically and quickly or die. I
don't want to see that happen.

Lol, the Church will never change it's views. It never has, and it has seen worse times then this, I can assure you that. The Church is doing fine. In fact, it's doing great. Those such as yourself just have a fabricated image in your head, that you unfortunately spread around to other people.

If any church is about to fall, it's about to be the entire Anglican communion falling right on it's face. In fact, it's already starting to happen. That is what happens when you sacrifice your religion for society- you no longer become a religious institution, but a social one.
Good luck with that.

 

[dragonfly]

Quote
The last thing they want is to be hampered by Christians slapping them around the head with a book of commands that none of them keep anyway.

Hi KC,

Christians do not expect 'homosexuals' to be keeping God's commands unless they turn from their idolatry -

Exodus 20: 3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me. 4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Romans 1:18 - 28 and more 5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; 6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments. 7 Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes his name in vain.

but don't let my quotation of Exodus confuse you. I know you have an idea that Christians are supposed to be keeping the OT commandments. (And I'm not sure if you've answered the post in which I replied to that point, but if you have, please refer me to the post #. Thanks.)

So, apart from your insistence that it is better for anyone who doesn't know God to be left in their sin, despite what God pronounced in Exodus 20 about the consequences of it, and despite Paul's reiteration in Romans 1:32, you show yourself to be ignorant of the gay agenda to sodomise all the small boys they can get their hands on, and generally promote themselves into a power to be feared.... not just a minority who would co-exist peacefully alongside 'straight' society, if left alone.

Additionally, you show no understanding whatever of the predatory nature of the spirits involved which demand expression through those in bondage to them, which they (and now, apparently, the Church) are supposed to accommodate unquestioningly,

!!! despite the inexpressible glory and power of the One who came to deliver them, wash them and sanctify them, and give them a place in His bride.

Are you afraid of the gospel, for if you really let it get under your skin, you would have to do some changing as well?

Is it easier to blend in with the world?

Galatians 1:10 For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.

Galatians 6:14 14 But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.

I noted from your earlier comments that you feel empowered to judge the written word of God for its cultural relevance, and to dispose of any part which you think is now inappropriate, especially in the light of your embarrassment by Christians who see that the whole word of God is not only true, but has the power to shine His light into the lives of those in darkness, to help them find their way to the light. I have no idea how you justify tinkering with the word of God, since Jesus was the Word made flesh, and He said this:

John 12:48 He that rejects me, and receives not my words, has one that judges him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.


Flee from being a man-pleaser. Matt 7:13 '... wide is the gate, and broad is the way leading to destruction, and many there be who go in thereat.


For your reference, Jesus quotation of Genesis 2 referred to by marksman, is in Matthew 19.

Quote
By the way, I'm still waiting to hear from someone where 'God' says anything about 'the homosexual act' per se

Okay. Remember Corinth was full of idolatry. There would have been more than a few males who had been sodomised, who turned to Christ for healing and salvation, but Paul is not clueless. He's a ROMAN citizen, and he was born in Tarsus - look at the name - which was renowned for its homosexual activity. He has grown up in a very males-hang-out-together society since he came of age (12 - 13) and he has probably seen every kind of sexual uncleanness at some stage or other. We don't know that he himself had not been a victim, since it's clear that some Pharisees were all talk and no walk. However he got to the understandings he expresses in Romans 1, he is speaking from a combination of revelation and observation, as well as his background in meditating upon and memorising scripture.

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, 10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. 11And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

Further to the relevance of idolatry

Leviticus 18:24 Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you: 25 And the land is defiled: therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomits out her inhabitants.


Now please look carefully at the start of this letter, to see who it is from, and relate that to marksmen's defence of marriage:

Revelation 3:14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God; 15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. 16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. 17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked: 18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see. 19 As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.

1 Corinthians 10:19 What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing? 20 But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils. 21 Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils.



A great many Christians do not like to know or believe that there are demons (devils) at all, and yet it is plain from the above text that idolatry is demon worship, regardless of the form it takes and expression which is given to it. John 4:22

Again I point you to Genesis 14:21, where the king of Sodom asked Abram for the 'persons': Hebrew word = souls. If the king of Sodom is so harmless, why does he want the souls of Abram's people???? (Hint: he's not harmless!)

So... apart from the possibility that ministry to homosexuals is not your calling or gift, why don't you care about them more?

Have you really found the healing and deliverance which you yourself need, or do you sympathise with the natural man, content to remain wounded and spiritually immobilised, rather than (let God) deal with the cause of his infirmities?

No need to answer, but do ask yourself why you are so keen to bat for the opposition. Are you ashamed of Christ?

 

[Foreigner]

>> That means that a minor who feels ready for sex who consents to an adult is something God will "get a good chuckle" over people condemning.
>> After all, God doesn't give a specific age limit, does He. That of course means He doesn't feel there is one, right?

Seducing children, having sex with children, should not be part of is part of this discussion about what consenting adults decide to do privately. Its an very old\bad argument to imply directly\indirectly that homosexuality leads people to sexually abuse children (or the mentally disabled).

Otherwise, IMHO, God is not concerned with the sexual activities between consenting adults.

-- Nice try but one here has implied that "homosexuality leads people to sexually abuse children."

Let's stick with YOUR words, shall we?

You said earlier that "God is not concerned with sexual activities between consenting adults." Then why would He have an issue with sex between a 40 year old man and 16 year old girl? After all, the Bible doesn't warn against it. And even if it did you have already shown you don't take the Bible seriously on matters of sexual activity anyway.
The age of consent in The Netherlands is 16 so God would be fine with it then, right?


But you also chose to completely skiped over the other points I brought up.

I undersand why, but if your point is correct you should easily be able to address these points, as well.
After all, they would be "consenting adults" - which seems to be your only yardstick for acceptability.

So again I say, according to your "consenting adults" standard for whether God accepts it or not, that would mean these would be acceptable to God too:


-- "Consenting adults" who are married to others, but become sexually active with each other.
I know the 7th Commandment says "Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery" but if it is just the body and not the heart, what's the problem, right?
You have already stated point blank that you feel God has no issue with what transpires sexually "between consenting adults."


-- If three or four "consenting adults" "feel love" for one another, they will then be able to participate in sex with each other all at once and God will be fine with it, right?
After all, the Bible doesn't specifically speak against it and - according to your own words - God has no problem with what "consenting adults" do sexually.


-- If a brother or sister or father and son or mother and daughter who are "consenting adults," choose to have sex, there should be no issue at all to God, correct? After all, according to you, He has no problem with sexual activity between "consenting adults" and thy obviously love each other, right?
(And please don't say it is wrong because of the risk of pregnancy and birth defects, Do you really want to recount the statistical damages of sex between men?)


-- And what of a "consenting adult" woman who chooses to see sexual gratification at the hands of an animal? If the animal is male and is a willful participant, who are you going to condemn in this situation? I know the Bible speaks specifically about this, but again you have shown you feel that the Bible doesn't really apply in areas of consentual sex, right?


You were just cracking a joke earlier about people who feel anything other than the missionary is "deviant sex."

Why then can't the same jokes be made about people who oppose what I just listed?

If your statement on God's opinion is correct, it should be very easy for you to justify what I have just listed.

So I ask with in all seriousness, using your standard of "consenting adults" and what you said God would "get a good chuckle" over, what could possibly be wrong in God's eyes with what I just listed? Especially when you have ruled that what the scripture says on the topic is null and void.

I am asking seriously, Jack...



.

 

[aspen]

beastiality and pedophilia have nothing to do with homosexual behavior between consenting adults. Animals and children cannot consent. I thought less goverment intervention was important to all you right wingers out there; so why the inconsistency on this topic?

 

[dragonfly]

Hi Foreigner,

I think there may be a 'no-' missing in the following:

-- Nice try but one here has implied that "homosexuality leads people to sexually abuse children."

Actually, I did, based on my reading of statistics on the subject, and based on a post which was removed from this thread by the moderators.

The commonest stat for male to male same-sex abuse is 25%. That number has been found in so many surveys, that there's a UK charity called 1in4. Bear in mind that the number refers to victims. It doesn't refer to how many times they've been molested, and it doesn't indicate anything about the perpetrators except that they offend against boys. Therefore, some of the perpetrators will offend against girls, too, and some will be men married to women. Some only offend within their family, some only offend outside the family and some offend both inside and outside the family.

One study compared the number of offences against victims with each other, comparing men abusing boys and men abusing girls. It concluded that the number of offences against a male victim could be significantly higher than those committed against female victims. Research has included asking perpetrators what they did, as well as victims what happened to them.

The statistic for female victims (which is comparable to one in four for boys), is one in three, although retrospective studies have also found over 50% women identifying themselves as survivors of childhood sexual abuse, the vast majority of perpetrators being men within the family circle.

The idea that male and female homosexuals only look for consenting adult relationships is yet another of the lies which the lgbt community are happy to foster. And the fact is, that many men don't want to think about whether they have a responsibility to protect children they know, even if they suspect another man of 'hanky panky'. It's much easier to say 'I could never have proved it', and leave the child to fend for itself. Christians do this all the time.

It has been estimated by some in the therapeutic community that 1 in 10 males offend against children. Likewise, when one researcher looked into the prevalence of female abusers, she had no shortage of women with an account to give. She estimated that 10% of abusers are female. As she was only investigating female to female abuse, it is safe to say that at least some males are sexually abused by females in their family, and in educational and in boarding institutions.

 

[JB_Reformed Baptist]

The word of God not only says it's a SIN but rather states it's an ABOMINATION.

"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." (Lev 20:13)

 

[dragonfly]

The word of God not only says it's a SIN but rather states it's an ABOMINATION.

"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." (Lev 20:13)

Hi JB,

One of the difficulties in this particular discussion, is that a large part of the church-going population imagine that if Jesus didn't mention a topic specifically, then He's okay with whatever modern man decides he wants to do. These 'believers' do not realise that Jesus, being God incarnate, still hates the same things about sin and idolatry which He always did, and His silence in the NT does not imply any reversal or change in what pleases Him. On the things which He changed, He universally raised the standard. Nothing upon which He had made a pronouncement, in any way set the bar lower than it had been.

 

[SilenceInMotion]

Actually, I did, based on my reading of statistics on the subject, and based on a post which was removed from this thread by the moderators.

I believe I have as well, though I can't seem to find it. Perhaps it's in another relative thread.

The ratio of girl and boy molestations is 2:1, or in other words, 33% of molesation has male victims. The percentage of homosexuals varies according to polls, being anywhere between 3 to 7 percent. But if we assume an average there, 5% of the worlds population gives way to 33% of child molestations.

*Getting away from the immediate subject*, let's look at the AIDS epidemic- in America, over 60% of all infections are within the homosexual community, the small few percent. When compared to the other 93+ percent, there is undeniably a problem which people deny.

*Getting back to the topic*, in the same way that is denied, so will this be:
The two things above reveal a fact. The fact is that homosexuality is induced by unchained sexual deviance. Homosexuals will have sex regardless of risk, and in some cases, obviously, even age.

Homosexuality is simply the wrong word for it when it's all said and done. What it is, is extreme sexual enterprise. It is idolatry. One must understand that this is why God destroyed Sodom, and why He set into law that homosexuals be stoned to death. Homosexuality is worse then rape by biblical standards. The reason being is because it is unnatural, and induces death, disease, and idolatry.

People have really decieved themselves outright in thinking homosexuality is not a sin, let alone acceptable. The object of homosexuality is part of a bigger construct. It is an object of vanity and unGodliness right next to any other sexual sin, but far greater in it's consequences. I see all this denial about the damage homosexuality does and quite frankly it's frustrating to see people purposefully blind themselves. How can you serve to be the light of this world if you actively perpetuate an agenda that hurts society?

 

[marksman]

beastiality and pedophilia have nothing to do with homosexual behavior between consenting adults. Animals and children cannot consent. I thought less goverment intervention was important to all you right wingers out there; so why the inconsistency on this topic?

There is no inconsistency at all and using pejorative statements (right wingers) is not the stuff of grace.

What you fail to realise is the slippery slope of human nature. When Lionel Murphy, the Australian Attorney General in 1973, introduced no fault divorce, he did not envisage the carnage it created.

The same with homosexuality of ANY kind. A conference has been held in the USA to discuss legalising paedophilia for homosexuals supported by the APA. The reason for it? Riding on the back of same sex marriage.

Take your finger out of the dyke and what happens. You get a flood, and as in this case, a flood of immorality.

Then I would suggest that you research - for YOURSELF - what the Bible has to say about this topic! Because, I don't believe that you have actually done so. If so, you would not have the mindset that you do. I would guess that, like most other Christians, you are 'parrotting' what your church pastor has 'parrotted' to you that someone 'parrotted' to him that someone ...and on and on.

You are wrong on every point.

FYI, pastors come to me for advice. I do not go to pastors.

I AM silly to allow myself to be caught up in 'an issue' that should not be 'an issue' to begin with.

We can all bury our heads in the sand and hope that it will go away or we can face up to reality and accept that satan is doing this likes a dog's dinner and he won't stop until he has squeezed every last drop out of it or until the church caves in completely.

 

[KCKID]

The word of God not only says it's a SIN but rather states it's an ABOMINATION.

"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." (Lev 20:13)

18:22 — You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.
Leviticus 20:13 — If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them.

For conservative Christians these texts seem pretty cut and dry. These texts are talking about same-sex practices. The offense is called an abomination, and the prescribed penalty is death. This all sounds pretty straightforward, and it sounds pretty bad. But what does this text mean in its own historical context?

The Holiness Code of Leviticus prohibits male same-sex practices because of religious considerations, not because of sexual ones. The concern is to keep Israel from taking part in Gentile practices. Same-sex practices are forbidden because they are associated with pagan activities (i.e., cultic prostitution), with idolatry and with Gentile identity. The argument in Leviticus is religious, not ethical or moral. That is to say, no thought is given to whether the sex in itself is right or wrong. All concern is for keeping Jewish identity strong.

Therefore, it is a misuse of the Bible to quote Leviticus as an answer to today’s ethical question of whether being gay is right or wrong. Leviticus was not addressing this question.
The concern in Leviticus, the cultural context of that text, and the meaning of male-male sex in ancient Israel are all very foreign to the present situation. Today’s question and the one in Leviticus are simply two different things.

To further underscore the point, the word “abomination” is simply another word for “unclean.” An “abomination” is a violation of the purity rules that governed Israelite society and kept the Israelites different from the other peoples. Early Israelites thought same-sex practices were dirty. They were prohibited, not because they were wrong in themselves, but because they offended religious sensitivities. Same-sex practices made a Jewish man look like a Canaanite. And to the Israelites, God’s chosen people, that was unacceptable.

I'm not sure whether or not I'm allowed to post a link but much more on this item can be found at such a link. And, it's a Lutheran site and NOT a 'gay' site.