Is homosexuality wrong in Christainity?

[lucaspa]

I was told a few months back that links to www.religioustolerance.org was against the rules..has that changed??

I haven't seen that rule. I can't imagine why linking to it would be against the rules. The site gives both sides without judgement on which is correct.

I also have to disagree that the Bible says slavery is ok..the Bibe tells us how slaves should be treated because slaves were a part of life in those days...

If slavery were not OK, the Hebrews would have been commanded not to keep them. For instance, eating pork was part of life in those days, too, but the Law forbade Hebrews to do so. There are several other examples of activity that were OK in those days that the Law commands against.

I would notice that, whatever your opinion about the verses are, if you look at the historical record of justifying slavery in America, you will find slaveholders (most if not all Christians) citing those verses as justification!

So, perhaps 100 years from now we will find someone like you also reinterpreting the verses now used to justify homophobia.

 

[lucaspa]

I was told a few months back that links to www.religioustolerance.org was against the rules..has that changed??

I can't find that in the Rules. I do note that Rule #4 limits debate on homosexuality to just a few forums, and this isn't one of them. So if we want to discuss the morality of homosexuality or homosexual unions, we must move the discussion.

So far, I think we have not gone into that, but only discussed the different attitudes within Christianity concerning the verses on homosexuality. However, we must be careful to keep the discussion within those bounds.

 

[Vag4]

Let's take the verse before the one you bolded:

6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

I think this makes the point that we should be careful about the letter of the law. When the letter comes in conflict with 'do unto others ..." I always choose the latter. And I would not like to be done unto as conservative Christians do unto homosexuals.

True, we are delivered from the law. Good example is that we are allowed to eat all sorts of food, which was called "impure" by the Jews. But I also quoted

Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said,

We cant just ignore the law, for when would we know what is good or bad? True that Jesus died for our sins against the law, but Jesus said we should be like him. Jesus never broke any of the rules stated in the bible.

 

[Triscuit]

Homosexuallity is a sin...It is a relationship that God did not intend for us (human population as a whole) to have.

 

[lucaspa]

Homosexuallity is a sin...It is a relationship that God did not intend for us (human population as a whole) to have.

We are getting very close to debating homosexuality. In fact, I can't think of any response to this post that would not be debating homosexuality. Please, Trisuit, read Rule #4 and put your opinions in the appropriate forums.

 

[lucaspa]

We cant just ignore the law, for when would we know what is good or bad?

But we do just that -- ignore the law. Or at least reinterpret it. For instance, the Law also states that I am to stone people who wear clothes of two different types of cloth! Do we do that? The Law states that I must take my "unruly" child to the edge of town and invite all the citizens to stone her! C'mon, would you really allow me to do that? Would you participate in the stoning?

Jesus said we should be like him. Jesus never broke any of the rules stated in the bible.

Yes, he did. Remember, he "harvested" wheat on the Sabbath. Didn't Jesus say "the Law is made for man, not man for the Law"?

As to knowing good and bad: is something good because God commands it or does God command it because it is good? I go with the latter. If I go with the first, I truly can never know what is good or bad; it's all at the whim of God.

The Law is a guideline, not an absolute. My firm belief is that we determine what is good or bad, using the "do unto others ..." as the ultimate guide. Mixed in with a lot of love and compassion. We have to use our feelings, reason, and prayer to figure out what is good.

If sexuality were a choice, I might agree. But sexuality is not a choice. I never chose to be hetero. I just reached puberty and looked at girls and went pant, pant, drool, drool. I see no evidence that it is any different for homos; conversations with homos indicate it is the same. Considering the persecution and danger of being homo, no one would choose to be one if they were hetero. Now, I don't want my search for love and companionship to be limited because I am what I am. Nor did I ever say over a baptism: "I will love and guide this child but only if it turns out to be heterosexual." The agape was unconditional. So, put those together and I simply can't condemn homosexuals simply because they are homosexuals. Nor can I deny them what I have: the opportunity to engage in a loving, sharing, sexual relationship. "If you this not to the least of these my brothers, you do it not to me." I reached the conclusion I have because of Christianity, not in spite of it.

 

[TheMainException]

Way to say it Whitestone

 

[Morning Star]

The Bible says that homosexuality is ''abominable,' in Leviticus 21. HOWEVER, I would like to remind you that the Bible also says that eating shellfish and crustaescians is evil, that anyone who curses their parents must be stoned, that any man who wears two different kinds of fabric at the same time must be stoned, and that any man who sows two types of crops in the same field must be stoned. That sicknesses and handicaps of any kind disgust God. (All of those were also Leviticus.)
The book didn't just fall out of the sky. While there may have been divine influence behind it, it was ultimately humans who put the words down. We have to be careful about how we choose to interpret them, and what we should and shouldn't believe/follow.
My best friend is gay. According to studies, one person out of every ten is. And when you tell a homosexual person that it's wrong for them to want someone of the same gender, you're denying them love. Tell me, is that right?

 

[Faith In God]

The Bible says that homosexuality is ''abominable,' in Leviticus 21. HOWEVER, I would like to remind you that the Bible also says that eating shellfish and crustaescians is evil, that anyone who curses their parents must be stoned, that any man who wears two different kinds of fabric at the same time must be stoned, and that any man who sows two types of crops in the same field must be stoned. That sicknesses and handicaps of any kind disgust God. (All of those were also Leviticus.)
The book didn't just fall out of the sky. While there may have been divine influence behind it, it was ultimately humans who put the words down. We have to be careful about how we choose to interpret them, and what we should and shouldn't believe/follow.
My best friend is gay. According to studies, one person out of every ten is. And when you tell a homosexual person that it's wrong for them to want someone of the same gender, you're denying them love. Tell me, is that right?

well, Paul says that no homosexual will inherit the kingdom of God.

 

[TriptychR]

This is a subject I have not been able to come to a firm decision about. I have a friend who is Christian and homosexual and seems to follow every aspect of the average Christian life other than that one. And as I have talked to my friend, the relationship they are in appears, to my knowledge, to be one more focused on agape than sexual lust. Can love like this actually exist? I just have trouble believing my friend is deluded.

 

[Jepublishinginc]

The Trinity and Balance of Marriage

​

I couldn’t help but to pay close attention to all the hoopla that’s going on this week about defining marriage. I have to tell you first that I am for a constitutional amendment defining marriage and I am not a republican. I am an African American democrat. However, I agree unconditionally with the republican’s stance on protecting the sanctity marriage. However, I don’t believe that their definition of it is completely defined.



Marriage is more than just a union between man and woman or a union between two people as the democrats and gay rights activist propose. Marriage is a sacred union that consists of three entities: God, man, and woman. It takes three to make a union, which a union is defined as three entities acting as one. Because it takes three to make a union, it could also be said that a union and a trinity has similar meanings. In order to have balance there must exist a trinity. For instance, a balanced earth consists of land, air, and water. A completely balanced circle consists of three 90-degree angles in which an angle consists of three points. The trinity of life is mind, body and soul. The development of a completely balanced human being consists of the union of knowledge, understanding, and wisdom. We also find that God himself cannot be one complete being without the complete balance of himself, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Oh, by the way, the reason why the union of the United States is so strong is because its balance of Executive, judicial and legislative branches. We can go on and on. But lets look into the main reason I brought up this point.



You see, in order for us to completely understand the union of marriage we must first understand the union of a family. If a union is equivalent to three balanced entities (a trinity), then this mean that a family is defined as the union of man, woman, and its offspring. We must also note that of all of these things that I have mentioned, if one entity is taken away, it will result in an unstable and unbalanced union. For example, if you were to take away air there would be no earth. If you were to take away one point from an angle there will be no circle which will result in there being no way to navigate and trigonometry will no longer be necessary. If you take away understanding or knowledge, wisdom will has no meaning. Lastly, if you were to erase the Son of God or the Holy Spirit then it is highly possible that God’s sovereignty becomes weakened or unbalanced.



What happens to family if the man or woman does not exist? The union of family becomes unbalanced, which will surely result in problems with the offspring. It could also be said that without God, man or woman, the union of marriage is incomplete or unbalanced.



In conclusion, marriage is more than just a union between Man and Woman because it takes three to make a union. Marriage is a union between God, man, and woman. This is why the Federal Marriage Amendment is so important. I encourage my African American sisters and brothers to use this election to make a statement. Let’s let the world know how important the sanctity of marriage and families is to us instead of allowing rappers and entertainers give the impression that we care nothing about family. We have to get out of this comfort zone with the democrats and become swing voters. I don’t know about you but loving God comes first before all things including the color of my skin. For this is one time in my life I completely agree with the republicans. Therefore, I am voting republican in the November 2004 elections. I feel that the democrats are at a point where anything goes including the destruction of God’s sovereignty. God has always been a major part of who we are as African Americans. The attack on the institute of marriage is an attack on God’s sovereignty, life’s balance, and us. The majority of our great grandmothers and grandfathers were God fearing people. Lets show them that we care about this issue and we are not afraid to say that it has part to do with what they call “religion”. Call your U.S. representatives and tell them that you support the Federal Marriage Amendment.

Written by
​

Jack Williams
​

Author of The 7th Letter
​

​

 

[prestonw]

I couldn’t help but to pay close attention to all the hoopla that’s going on this week about defining marriage. I have to tell you first that I am for a constitutional amendment defining marriage and I am not a republican. I am an African American democrat. However, I agree unconditionally with the republican’s stance on protecting the sanctity marriage. However, I don’t believe that their definition of it is completely defined.

I'll respond to this. The government is not out there to be the religous police. Marriage in governmental terms is simply the giving of additional rights to the people who are married. Examples include: Inheritence rights, hospital visits, parental rights, joint filing rights, etc. Marriage at the governmental level has absolutly nothing to do with religion. Without a consitutional admendment, churches are still free to choose which people can get married within their church and nothing will change that (1st amendment and all).

Here is a question for you, if a gay couple adopts a child and then one leaves the relationship, should the one leaving have to pay to support the child? Since they were never married at the government level, they were not able to adopt the child together and one is left to singlehandedly pay for the child.

This is one example of how a ban on gay marriage (which is still in place in most states) affects people (the child in my example) other then the couple. So, in conclusion, I'd like to ask, how does allowing gay couples to have the same rights as straight couple affects you and your life? You may not support the life style (I don't) and may not want it in your church (and you are free not to allow it), but I don't think they should be denied basic rights and that is what an amendment would do.

 

[DidiCh]

It's quite easy really. We read the same Bible as you do; however, we don't presume that what it says in an English translation of a 2000 years and more old collection of writings is directly applicable to today, without learning a lot more about the historical/religious/literary context of the original text than most fundamentalists deem necessary. Once we discover, for instance, that there is no reference to homosexual practice in the OT or the NT that is unconnected to pagan Temple prostitution, or other forms of pagan worship, we begin to question the universality of one particular interpretation.

One thing we never do is assume that our interpretation of the Bible is the only possible one; nor do we justify our own hatreds and prejudices by referencing the Bible.

Of course, it's so much easier to avoid thinking by just accepting what you're told, isn't it? that's what's known as "cheap grace."

I'm sorry to hear that you consider it as "cheap grace".

I can tell you from my own personal experience that it was not "so much easier to avoid thinking by just accepting what I was told". Nobody told me.

Let me tell you a bit about myself. I was a lesbian, living in a full on lesbian relationship when I got saved. Through the "CHEAP GRACE" of God I became a new person, through Gods grace I was renewed, restored and healed, and only through His grace. This would have not been posible if I didn't surrender my ENTIRE LIFE and IDENTITY to Him.

He changed me, and don't you for one instance think that it was easy!

When my flesh cried out with carnal desires, my spirit cried out for Gods presence. I wasn't told by anyone that homosexuality was wrong, I didn't even get to read about that until later, and when I did read about it, and had taken it to my heavenly Father in prayer, I accepted that all the change and discomfort that was occuring in me was due to Gods hatred towards sin, in particular the one that I had found myself so fervently involved in.

Through Jesus blood I am born again and cleansed from sin.

 

[PotLuck]

That's one heck of a post DidiCh. One heck of a post indeed.

I tend to look at it this way. If we don't use the Word of God it'll be taken from us. It's already happening in Canada through the restrictions imposed when gay marriage was accepted by way of "hate-literature" and/or "hate-speech". A pastor can not preach a sermon viewed as anti-gay without risk of winding up in jail. I can imagine God saying, "Well, since you don't want my Word then so be it."

But then that's just my 2 cents. Who knows. We'll find out when we get there.

 

[daddyzgurl7]

basiclly do u kno of sodem and gomera well God distroyed those places because of the great sin ther but also because the homosexuals tried to have sex with the angels and God hates homosexuals

 

[DidiCh]

basiclly do u kno of sodem and gomera well God distroyed those places because of the great sin ther but also because the homosexuals tried to have sex with the angels and God hates homosexuals

God doesn't hate homosexuals, He loves everyone, He created us, what He hates is sin. Therefore He encourages us to obey His Word and live holy lives to glorify Him.

 

[PotLuck]

God doesn't hate homosexuals, He loves everyone, He created us, what He hates is sin. Therefore He encourages us to obey His Word and live holy lives to glorify Him.

Right on again DidiCh.

Hate the sin, love the sinner.

And I gotta tell ya, I need all the love and mercy I can get

 

[DidiCh]

...love the sinner.

And I gotta tell ya, I need all the love and mercy I can get

I know!!! Tell me about it!!!

 

[abking]

Tell me this, me a male sexualy abused as a child by my father where do i stand if God doesn't like gays. The experance has all ways been with me. i have read my bible, even tried to kill my self because of my thoughts, I even got married to a nice girl. this still doesn't stop me getting hot over men. To make things even worse i have even recently been with a man. Sad but he's a Pasters son. He wanted me, I keeped well away as long as i could, My problem is i love him so much more than i have loved any one, even my wife. He has problems with this but.

 

[Celticflower]

It is not that God doesn't like gays, He loves all His children, but the actions of those children do not always please Him. The action is the sin (at least that is what I was taught) not the person. The person can always be forgiven if they acknowledge and repent of the action.
Homosexual acts are not compatible with Christian teachings, but the gay individual should be welcomed and loved by the church.

abking--I will be praying for you.

Celtie