Biblically: Why is homosexuality wrong?

[Secundulus]

I have seen it stated many time how Paul continue have understood homosexual monogomous love, and so he must have been speaking only of hetrosexuals doing homosexual acts or ....................................

So I find it really contradictory and almost funny, if it wasn't a serious matter, that Boswell would say stuff like:

Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable.

Boswell is making things up. Emperors did not often marry other males. Lesbianism was deplored. And homosexuality between citizens was illegal. What was accepted was sex with a slave where the slave was always the passive recipient. This is because in that culture, the passive male was seen as repugnant. Sex in that culture was not about love, but was about power. Trying to read modern attitudes on sex into 1st century culture is an anachronism. This error is equally true on both sides of the argument.

For a contemporary Roman attitude from the first century look up Juvenal's Satire 2.8-13.

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

I've been debating with my cousin who's bi for a while about why homosexuality is wrong in light of Scripture. She argues that the bible is clearly against male-male homosexuality, but mentions nothing about female-female. What are your thoughts?

Biblically, why is homosexuality wrong?

although its often argued, the romans 1 passage shows same-sex sex as a judgment against a people by God. They were given over to the lusts of their hearts. It is also used in scripture elsewhere as an example of depravity, although Sodom was most likely destroyed for 'inhospitality' as well as a multitude of other sins, their attempt at homosexual rape was just an example of how depraved the people had become. This, along with 1cor6:9, which is often argued (arsenokoites), the leviticus man-lying passage, and the total lack of any positive examples of same-sex sex, shows the biblical attitude towards it.

 

[KCKID]

. . .and the total lack of any positive examples of same-sex sex, shows the biblical attitude towards it.

How many scriptures refer to positive examples of heterosexual sex ...?

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

How many scriptures refer to positive examples of heterosexual sex ...?

are you serious? Every mention of a child being born/conceived of a husband and wife, I'd rather not pick through passages trying to find them all, unless you really need to see them for some reason.

 

[radlad72]

If it was natural, it would have been made so that same-sex partners in whatever species could procreate. Sin is the cause of this unnatural urge to be with the same sex when it was meant to be opposite to this.

Even evolutionists would tell you that this is unnatural. It is not a way for any species to survive. Thus is goes against what God intended and it also goes against the evolutionary idea as well (not that I am a believer in evolution). Both sides in agreeance. Who'da thunk it?

Rad

 

[KCKID]

are you serious? Every mention of a child being born/conceived of a husband and wife, I'd rather not pick through passages trying to find them all, unless you really need to see them for some reason.

What?!! So one's being born is a positive example of heterosexual sex? Let's see ...for starters the jails are full of these positive examples of sex. Positive examples of sex also produces shifty politicians, blood-sucking lawyers, greedy oil executives, merciless pharmaceutical CEOs, wife bashers, child abusers, the Fred Phelps Family, the list is endless. It seems like your positive example of heterosexual sex results in more and more and more 'filthy rags' being born into the world ...scripturally speaking (Isaiah 64:6). You know, according to the Bible, MOST of these positive examples of sex will be annihilated ...or they will burn in hell for eternity if you happen to be a mainstreamer.

Even the Bible's positive examples of heterosexual sex resulted in God's having to destroy them, Noah's flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, individuals who couldn't hold on to the Ark of the Covenant, etc.

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

What?!! So one's being born is a positive example of heterosexual sex? Let's see ...for starters the jails are full of these positive examples of sex. Positive examples of sex also produces shifty politicians, blood-sucking lawyers, greedy oil executives, merciless pharmaceutical CEOs, wife bashers, child abusers, the Fred Phelps Family, the list is endless. It seems like your positive example of heterosexual sex results in more and more and more 'filthy rags' being born into the world ...scripturally speaking (Isaiah 64:6). You know, according to the Bible, MOST of these positive examples of sex will be annihilated ...or they will burn in hell for eternity if you happen to be a mainstreamer.

I was talking about the miracle of birth, not what people turn into during the course of their lives. If you think that the creation of human beings is somehow connected to what evil they may do, then we are talking about a completely different subject.

Even the Bible's positive examples of heterosexual sex resulted in God's having to destroy them, Noah's flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, individuals who couldn't hold on to the Ark of the Covenant, etc.

once again, you are blaming the miracle of birth for the atrocities people have committed, and God's judgment against them. These two things do not correlate at all, and as of yet (if I didn't know you), I'd think you were promoting atheism based on your comments thus far in the thread. As christians, whose faith is rooted very much in scripture, should we not treat it with the respect it deserves?

we can see the standard God set for family relationships from the book of genesis:

18 The LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him."

24 For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.


Anyhoo, this is so far off course of the OT, so I'll leave it here, I posted why same-sex sex is biblically condemned, so please explain why it is not biblically condemned. Peace.

 

[Phinehas2]

Biologically the penis is designed and compatible with the vagina, for function.
Now the penis could be inserted anywhere, but it isn’t designed to. One can easily see that Biblically the idea that God created male and female so that a man and a women should unite as one flesh describes the observable facts.
We tell the sex of a person, male or female, from these sexual organs. The reproduction of the species has been dependant on male and female.
The challenge the gay thinking represents is therefore is a major one. It alters the concept of the way we define by function to definition by desire.
One of the reasons paedophilia is often mentioned in these debates is that paedophilia is widely detested, and quite rightly in my opinion, so the illustration of the argument stands out.
However hetero/homo sexuality are sexual attraction/orientation. Consider this though, whilst the function of penis and anus between two men is incompatible, the function of penis and vagina between a man and a girl is only partly incompatible in that the function of reproduction isn’t yet developed, but the two sexual organs are.
But when it comes to definition by sexual attraction rather than biological function, there is little difference, the paedophile is sexually attracted to children, the heterosexual to the opposite sex and the homosexual to the same sex.

 

[KCKID]

I'm unsure as to why pedophilia came into this topic but, since it did, wasn't it 'biblically-sound' for a young girl - 12/13 years-old, perhaps ...way underage by our standards - to have sex with an older man?

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear KCKID,
No. Firstly what if it was, that doesnt help the same-sex cause. Secondly peadophilia was mentioned as an example of a sexual attraction like heterosexual and homosexual rather than a biological attribute.

 

[jamielindas]

This is just one logical fallacy after another...

What harm does gay sex and gay relationships ACTUALLY directly do to you and your life?

 

[RMDY]

I've been debating with my cousin who's bi for a while about why homosexuality is wrong in light of Scripture. She argues that the bible is clearly against male-male homosexuality, but mentions nothing about female-female. What are your thoughts?

Biblically, why is homosexuality wrong?

You also need to discern what your friend believes: Does he believe that humans evolved from apes or does he believe God created men and woman in his image and not from animals? Often I come to this forum accepting God created us in his image only to have homosexual advocatists attempting to refute me with their belief that we evolved from apes or that the story of Adam and Eve is a myth that never happened.

 

[jamielindas]

You also need to discern what your friend believes: Does he believe that humans evolved from apes or does he believe God created men and woman in his image and not from animals? Often I come to this forum accepting God created us in his image only to have homosexual advocatists attempting to refute me with their belief that we evolved from apes or that the story of Adam and Eve is a myth that never happened.

Does whether or not it's a myth change the moral lessons that people learn from it?
Does the belief in evolution require one to be fine with homosexuality? I didn't think so.. but...
Does belief in creationism require one to be against homosexuality?

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

This is just one logical fallacy after another...

What harm does gay sex and gay relationships ACTUALLY directly do to you and your life?

The topic is Biblically: Why is homosexuality wrong? not "What harm does homosexuality do?"

 

[jamielindas]

The topic is Biblically: Why is homosexuality wrong? not "What harm does homosexuality do?"

That's the point I was trying to make earlier. What is this moral objection really based on? Instead of basing morals on compassion, love, and preventing people from suffering, it's based on how some people interpret their holy text.
I get tired of people using the bible to justify their intolerance of something they don't have a legitimate problem with.

clearly, the bible has a much bigger problem with atheists. Why do we(americans) let them marry? why do we let them hold public office? why do we let them adopt?
Why is there this crusade to use the bible to oppress the gays and not the atheists? Why the selectivity?

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

That's the point I was trying to make earlier. What is this moral objection really based on? Instead of basing morals on compassion, love, and preventing people from suffering, it's based on how some people interpret their holy text.
I get tired of people using the bible to justify their intolerance of something they don't have a legitimate problem with.

I have no problem with gay people, and I don't really care to know what anyone does in their bedroom. How is that intolerance?

clearly, the bible has a much bigger problem with atheists. Why do we(americans) let them marry? why do we let them hold public office? why do we let them adopt?
Why is there this crusade to use the bible to oppress the gays and not the atheists? Why the selectivity?

men and women are free to get married to one another, regardless of religion. Personally, I could care less if 2 men or 2 women married one another, as I view it as a civil contract rather than a God blessed institution. The bible makes no room for same-sex marriage, and only negativity towards same-sex sexual behavior, so theres no reason to believe that God would give blessing upon same-sex marriage.

About public office and adoption, if they are responsible enough for the job, so be it, as any other person would be held to.

Oppression is obviously a factor for several minority groups, but you can't solely blame Christianity on it, rather than those who oppress others under the christian banner. There's no part of scripture that tells us to judge and condemn others, or weigh our sin and if its lighter than our neighbors we should beat him over the head with his.

 

[KCKID]

That's the point I was trying to make earlier. What is this moral objection really based on? Instead of basing morals on compassion, love, and preventing people from suffering, it's based on how some people interpret their holy text.
I get tired of people using the bible to justify their intolerance of something they don't have a legitimate problem with.

While I enjoy having a few occasional digs with Jet he IS generally a pretty easy going guy to get along with and I appreciate that. And so, I don't know that he's the one who you need to be taking your frustration out on ...NOT that you are, I suspect. He's looking at the issue from a scriptural perspective and the way he sees it 'biblically' as the title of the thread suggests.

I'm with you, however, as to your searching for the ACTUAL REASON why God disapproves of homosexuality - if indeed He DOES disapprove. I can't quite get my head around the idea that the actions of two consenting individuals who want to share intimacies together would be considered to be 'a sin'. It's really not enough to pass it off with the remark: "Because God says so in the Bible." I mean, we generally know why other human actions might be taboo or off-limits without even referring to the Bible. Generally speaking, the 'act of homosexuality' (and who knows exactly what that act might be?) appears to be a 'victimless' one.

clearly, the bible has a much bigger problem with atheists. Why do we(americans) let them marry? why do we let them hold public office? why do we let them adopt?
Why is there this crusade to use the bible to oppress the gays and not the atheists? Why the selectivity?

The OBVIOUS selectivity of the scriptures that I see in regard to what 'sins' to focus on and what 'sins' to turn a blind eye to is the very common one involving adultery. Most Christians who would decry homosexuality at the drop of a hat don't seem to have any idea what adultery even is. We have a number of people in my own church that have divorced one spouse and married another. Jesus clearly states that these people are living in adultery as long as the former spouses are still living. Moreover, Jesus says that adultery is a sin. Okay, one might ask the same question about this common situation in many churches thru'out the world. That is: Biblically, why is adultery wrong? Once the question has been answered to one's satisfaction one might also add: Why then does the church approve of adultery which Jesus condemned while condemning homosexuality which Jesus didn't?

I don't particularly have a problem with those people who happen to divorce and remarry.* But, I don't particularly have a problem with homosexuality either. The thing is, those who DO have a problem with homosexuality should VERY MUCH have a problem with those who have divorced and remarried ...particularly those who hold church office. NOT to do so is blatant hypocrisy!

*I personally could not stand the thought that my wife was being intimate with ANYONE else. I personally could not stand the thought that my children were a part of such a relationship. But, that's just me.

 

[Phinehas2]

This is just one logical fallacy after another...

What harm does gay sex and gay relationships ACTUALLY directly do to you and your life?

If one believes the word of God then it is error and a barrier to the Kingdom of God, thats what the word of God says and why leading gay advocates rip out the pages in the Bible which say this... so its not logical fallicy but fact.
In terms of biology there are also studies which show various things, I happen to believe penis/anus sex is highly dangerous as well as bilogically it is incompatible function, gays are most likely to engage in this.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear KCKID

I'm with you, however, as to your searching for the ACTUAL REASON why God disapproves of homosexuality - if indeed He DOES disapprove.

Well the evidence says he does, you merely dispute the evidence yet there is no countenance of it, so on what basis do you not know?

I can't quite get my head around the idea that the actions of two consenting individuals who want to share intimacies together would be considered to be 'a sin'.

Well ok but God’s wisdom is greater than ours don’t you agree? Furthermore again God’s word say when we sin sexually, unlike other sins, it defiles our own bodies which are temples of the Holy Spirit. Is it that you question things because you don’t know God’s word well enough?

 

[RMDY]

if indeed He DOES disapprove. I can't quite get my head around the idea that the actions of two consenting individuals who want to share intimacies together would be considered to be 'a sin'.

This is not the right approach towards God I believe. For example, who knows what kind of Red-necks have the same attitude and marry their SISTER! AH! THE PAIN! (just joking )

Just still, anyone could use this same logic to try to justify incest for example (brother-to-sister relationship). http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7182817.stm

As the article says:

"A pair of twins who were adopted by separate families as babies got married without knowing they were brother and sister, a peer told the House of Lords."