Homosexuality and the Church

[Pah]

The Bible makes it pretty clear that homosexual acts of any kind are deviant:

"For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due." Romans 1:26-27


I don't think it could get much clearer. Homosexual acts are clearly condemned by Scripture.

FerventGodSeeker
​

:biglaugh: What is natural for the gay community - homosexual acts. This verse says that they should not act hererosexually:biglaugh:

 

[barnabus]

I am sorry, but I have this strange notion that God condemns homosexuality. And furthermore, Paul Epistle to the Romans was to a society with its share of homosexuals. I have found no reason to infer a justification of homosexual practices based on Romans 1:26.

Of course that makes me a politically incorrect barbarian, but so have it.

 

[Jerrell]

What was natural? God Created Adam for Eve, not a man for a man or woman for woman. Since creation man has been with women, but some have always abandoned this and went unto their own, this is unnatural and is in no way natural.

 

[FerventGodSeeker]

:biglaugh: Why that would include me :biglaugh: I think that rests our case.

A significant portion of heterosexual men are effeminate. And the rest have lessor degress of the charactieristic. It would mean that motorcycle gays are not homosexual nor dyke lesbians.

You no longer have an argument. :biglaugh:

Now get your church in line and stop this bickering about what the Bible says.

standing_alone already mentioned that, and I already responded. The Biblical argument against homosexuality is still just as strong, because of other passages which clearly indicate that homosexual acts of any kind (effeminate, "butch", or otherwise) are deviant and immoral. My church is in line, but thanks for suggestion.
​

 

[FerventGodSeeker]

:biglaugh: What is natural for the gay community - homosexual acts. This verse says that they should not act hererosexually:biglaugh:

That's like saying that alcoholism is "natural" for someone with a disposition for alcoholism...that still doesn't make it right The obvious reference to "the natural use" in this passage is the standard, male/female sexual relationship of human beings who are naturally, biologically, self-evidently designed to interact sexually as heterosexuals...are you really that blind that you can't see the obvious statement of the verse? If you can't even see that from such an obvious, plain verse, there's really no point in continuing.

FerventGodSeeker
​

 

[Pah]

standing_alone already mentioned that, and I already responded. The Biblical argument against homosexuality is still just as strong, because of other passages which clearly indicate that homosexual acts of any kind (effeminate, "butch", or otherwise) are deviant and immoral. My church is in line, but thanks for suggestion.
​

I disagree with what you've said. If you can't tell the difference between effeminate and homosexual, you have no business telling us what we should do about. Your arguments are entirely discredited when you have no understanding of definitional key words.

If that is the position of your church, then it too is in gross social and debative error.

I am planning a new thread about cultural practises in Biblical times where members will be asked to define the practise of homosexuality of that time. I can't wait to see your response, if you even make one.

 

[Pah]

What was natural? God Created Adam for Eve, not a man for a man or woman for woman. Since creation man has been with women, but some have always abandoned this and went unto their own, this is unnatural and is in no way natural.

It natural is what occurs in nature then you are summarily wrong. If God is the creator of nature, then the abundance of homosexual species gives proof you are wrong.

 

[Pah]

That's like saying that alcoholism is "natural" for someone with a disposition for alcoholism...that still doesn't make it right The obvious reference to "the natural use" in this passage is the standard, male/female sexual relationship of human beings who are naturally, biologically, self-evidently designed to interact sexually as heterosexuals...are you really that blind that you can't see the obvious statement of the verse? If you can't even see that from such an obvious, plain verse, there's really no point in continuing.

FerventGodSeeker
​

Whatever you see, even with clouded and myoptic eye, is obvious to you. Unfortunetly, you can not replace the words themselves with an emotional plea.

I would be willing to hear from you a complete, literal translation of the verse with all possibles meaning of the Greek. Then, and only then, will you have credence.

 

[Pah]

I am sorry, but I have this strange notion that God condemns homosexuality. And furthermore, Paul Epistle to the Romans was to a society with its share of homosexuals. I have found no reason to infer a justification of homosexual practices based on Romans 1:26.

Of course that makes me a politically incorrect barbarian, but so have it.

"A politically incorrect barbarian"? Nah!

I will put to you the same request I've made of FerventGodSeeker - namely "I would be willing to hear from you a complete, literal translation of the verse with all possibles meaning of the Greek". But in addition, I wondered if you have numbers and a source for those nuumbers of a "share of homosexuals". It would be nice if they compared with the other cultures of the time.

It might also interest you that justification is not what the gay community seeks. Knowing one's self is all the justification required. What is required by the gay community is not God's approval for they already have that. They seek equality and equality only

 

[FerventGodSeeker]

I disagree with what you've said.

Well that's a shocker, lol.

If you can't tell the difference between effeminate and homosexual, you have no business telling us what we should do about. Your arguments are entirely discredited when you have no understanding of definitional key words.

I do indeed understand the difference between effeminate and homosexual as we define them today. However, in King James English, words like, "effeminate", "sodomite", etc, are obvious references to homosexuals: those who engage in sexual activities with those of the same sex.

If that is the position of your church, then it too is in gross social and debative error.

Well I'm sorry you feel that way. My church takes a moral stand against homosexual activity. If you don't like it, you're free not to attend .

I am planning a new thread about cultural practises in Biblical times where members will be asked to define the practise of homosexuality of that time. I can't wait to see your response, if you even make one.

I'm certainly not an expert on homosexuality or how it has changed or developed through time, but I'll certainly make comments if I feel the need. Thanks for the invite.

FerventGodSeeker

 

[fredmatthew25]

I will feed a homosexual if he is hungry (or she) I will accept them and clothe them and put a roof over their head. However, the church is not responsible in accepting the actions of homosexuality and should not conform to the shaping of society as its values and mores degenerate. The church needs to be a beacon of hope and truth in a sinful world. Purity is what God desires. And that covers a whole bunch of stuff that we are all guilty of. (Homosexuality is not the only sin that God hates) Either way, we need to make due and accept God's grace that He loves us even with our sin. All the more reason for me to bend the knee and accept His will for my life.
Peace out yall!

 

[standing_alone]

However, the church is not responsible in accepting the actions of homosexuality and should not conform to the shaping of society as its values and mores degenerate.

How does homosexuality cause society's values and mores to degenerate?

 

[Pah]

Well that's a shocker, lol.


I do indeed understand the difference between effeminate and homosexual as we define them today. However, in King James English, words like, "effeminate", "sodomite", etc, are obvious references to homosexuals: those who engage in sexual activities with those of the same sex. No you do not understand. And now you throw in "sodomite" another error. Homosexuality or anal sex is NOT mentioned in the story of Lot.

Read Judges 19 and tell me what that story shows about the impurity of homosexuality and murder in the commission of gang rape. Reconcile it to Sodom.

Well I'm sorry you feel that way. My church takes a moral stand against homosexual activity. If you don't like it, you're free not to attend .

But I'm not free "to not attend" when that stance is made law. You, plural, force your religious beliefs on me whether I attend or not. And that, my friend is an anathma and an adbomination in today's sense of the word to the Constitution.

I'm certainly not an expert on homosexuality or how it has changed or developed through time, but I'll certainly make comments if I feel the need. Thanks for the invite.

If you can not understand the cultural norm of the time nor the original languages and their nuances you will be doomed to make erroneous interpretations.

 

[Jerrell]

The Problem Arises when you try to conform the Church to the World. The world is to conform to the Church not the other way around.
Homosexuality is a sin.
Le 20:13 -If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Jud 19:22 - Show Context Now as they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, certain sonsofBelial, beset the house round about, and beat at the door, and spake to the master of the house, the old man, saying, Bring forth the man that came into thine house, that we may know him.

The hebrew word Yada, translated "may know" is the word used to inference Sexual intercourse. It is the same word used when Adam had sex with Eve, he "knew"(Yada) her.

Romans1:24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. 26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. 28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient

According to the Bible homosexuality is sin. Christ calls Christians to be dead unto sin, not to live in them.

Ro 6:11 - Show Context Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed untosin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.

1Pe 2:24 - Show Context Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.

If you are saved you are healed of your sin, saved from it. You dont continue to live in your sin.
Fornicators dont go to heaven, Murderers dont go, liars dont go. These kinds of poeple just dont do that which christians do. Did you know Homosexuality is on the same list as these?

1Co 6:9 - Show Context 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

Homosexuals wont Inherit the Kingdom of Heaven. Now Wether gays be in the church(building, in this case) or not. They are not saved. they are just sinners, in need to give up their sin.
There is a need for change in ourselves. We need to give up our sinful ways and live for the Lord.

 

[standing_alone]

Homosexuals wont Inherit the Kingdom of Heaven. Now Wether gays be in the church(building, in this case) or not. They are not saved. they are just sinners, in need to give up their sin.
There is a need for change in ourselves. We need to give up our sinful ways and live for the Lord.

But isn't everyone a sinner? What makes homosexuality any worse of a sin than others?

 

[Feathers in Hair]

But isn't everyone a sinner? What makes homosexuality any worse of a sin than others?

Easy! If people want to justify their own biases and anger, then make it a worse sin than the others! (Or get more angry about it.) Love the sinner and hate the sin, but be sure to let that sinner know that they're sinning. Otherwise, they might think they're actually equal to the person who's judging them.


It's always sad, in any faith, when some people choose to interpret things the way that they prefer to.

 

[FerventGodSeeker]

Whatever you see, even with clouded and myoptic eye, is obvious to you. Unfortunetly, you can not replace the words themselves with an emotional plea.

I would be willing to hear from you a complete, literal translation of the verse with all possibles meaning of the Greek. Then, and only then, will you have credence.

"Because of this, God gave them up to dishonorable passions, for even their females changed the natural use to that contrary to nature. And likewise, the males also having forsaken the natural use of the female burned in their lust toward one another, males with males working out shamefulness, and receiving back within themselves the reward which was fitting for their straying away." Interlinear Greek-English New Testament, Jay P. Green, Sr.

"Because of this gave up them God to passions of dishonor; the even for females of them changed the natural use to the (use) against nature; likewise and also the males having forsaken the natural use of the female, burned in the lust of them toward one another, males among males the shamefulness working out, and the reward which behoved the straying of them, in themselves receiving back." (also by Jay P. Green, Sr., without arranging the words into English language configuration)

"For this reason gave up them God to passions of dishonour, both for females their changed the natural use into that contrary to nature; and in like manner also the males having left the natural use of the female, were inflamed in their lust towards one another, males with males shame working out, and the recompense which was fit of their error in themselves receiving." Interlinear Greek-English New Testament With a Greek-English Lexicon and New Testament Synonyms, by George Ricker Berry

"Through this gave beside them the God into passions of dishonor; the and for females of them exchanged the natural use into the (one) beside nature, likewise and also the males having let go off the natural use of the female were burned out in the lust of them into one another males in males, the indecency working down and the return reward which it was necessary of the error of them in them receiving (back) from." The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures, by the New World Bible Translation Committee

"Because of this God gave them over to dishonorable passions, for even their females exchanged their natural use for that which is against nature. And likewise also males, burned themselves out in their lustful appetite toward one another, males with males carrying to its ultimate conclusion that which is shameful, receving in themselves that retribution which was a necessity in the nature of the case because of their deviation from the norm." The New Testament: An Expanded Translation, by Kenneth S. Wuest

Hope all this isn't to "myopic" for you, LOL (I mean sheesh, I wear contacts, lol). It's now your job to present a translation or explanation of this passage, based on the language used, which somehow condones homosexuality. God bless.

FerventGodSeeker





​

 

[FerventGodSeeker]

No you do not understand. And now you throw in "sodomite" another error. Homosexuality or anal sex is NOT mentioned in the story of Lot.

In case you weren't aware, the story of Lot is not the only place in the Bible where Sodom is mentioned. Sodom and Gomorrah were known to be placed of sexual immorality, including rampant homosexuality, prostitution, etc.

Read Judges 19 and tell me what that story shows about the impurity of homosexuality and murder in the commission of gang rape. Reconcile it to Sodom.

I really don't know what you're point is here. Judges 19 tells the story of a traveler and his concubine who come to a guy's house to stay the night, and they get assualted by a bunch of perverted men there who want to rape the man. The owner of the house offers the man's concubine, however, and so they rape her all night. When they free her early the next morning she collapses on the doorstep of the man's house. When he sees her lying there and she does not move or respond, he cuts her up and scatters her body parts, presumably because he takes her for dead. All in all it's not a pleasant story. However, I don't see what this has to do with a)the sexual immorality of Sodom, or b) the Biblical acceptance of homosexuality.

But I'm not free "to not attend" when that stance is made law. You, plural, force your religious beliefs on me whether I attend or not. And that, my friend is an anathma and an adbomination in today's sense of the word to the Constitution.

How am I forcing my religious beliefs on you? The Constitution doesn't say anything about whether or not homosexuality is morally acceptable or not, so I have no clue why you brought that up.

If you can not understand the cultural norm of the time nor the original languages and their nuances you will be doomed to make erroneous interpretations.

Ditto. I have yet to see your explanation of how the verses we have discussed in any way condone homosexuality.

FerventGodSeeker
​

 

[Angel of Truth]

It's not an issue of condoning homosexuality. Homosexual tendencies transcend a person's 'choice', being determined on a chemical and psychological level, and so cannot be regarded as true sin. I actually see homosexuality as meritable. It shows a willingness to express one's true feelings, an honesty seldom seen in this world. And who cares if someone is homosexual, how does it hurt you? Be more concerned with the alcoholic or drug addict who may get behind the wheel and end up killing someone.

 

[Pah]

The Problem Arises when you try to conform the Church to the World. The world is to conform to the Church not the other way around

Not in the United States and not according to Jesus MK 12:17, MT 22:21, LK 23:2. and in contect of those verses

Jud 19:22 - Show Context Now as they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, certain sonsofBelial, beset the house round about, and beat at the door, and spake to the master of the house, the old man, saying, Bring forth the man that came into thine house, that we may know him.

yada'
Hebrew for "to know" (lit. "he knows"). This verb has a range of meaning from knowing something intellectually to being sexually intimate with someone. In a legal context, it refers to the faithful relationship of two parties to a covenant who "know" each other as allies. Frequently, it refers to the specific covenant relationship called a suzerainty treaty, and refers to the vassal's acknowledgement of exclusive allegiance to the overlord. http://www.jcu.edu/bible/BibleIntroReadings/Glossary.htm

to know

YADA
1. (Qal)
1. to know 1a
2. to know, learn to know 1a
3. to perceive 1a
4. to perceive and see, find out and discern 1a
5. to discriminate, distinguish 1a
6. to know by experience 1a
7. to recognise, admit, acknowledge, confess 1a
8. to consider
1. to know, be acquainted with
2. to know (a person carnally)
3. to know how, be skilful in
4. to have knowledge, be wise
9. (Niphal)
1. to be made known, be or become known, be revealed
2. to make oneself known
3. to be perceived
4. to be instructed
10. (Piel) to cause to know
11. (Poal) to cause to know
12. (Pual)
1. to be known
2. known, one known, acquaintance (participle)
13. (Hiphil) to make known, declare
14. (Hophal) to be made known
15. (Hithpael) to make oneself known, reveal oneself http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=03045&version=kjv

Now that you really know "know", can you relate the story (not copy it but interpretate it) of the two cities?