1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Homosexuality in the Bible

Discussion in 'Biblical Debates' started by linwood, Oct 7, 2004.

  1. linwood

    linwood Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,048
    Ratings:
    +861
    I wish to point out the inconsistencies concerning homosexuality in the bible.

    Specifically homosexual behavior either condoned or ignored by God in the Bible.

    I have previously posted some of what I will be posting here elsewhere but I haven’t made my point clear enough it seems.

    I wish to clarify it to the best of my abilities here, now.

    I first want to point out that what I` m doing is ultimately pointless because I don’t believe the Bible should have any bearing on how a person lives their life or what society deems ethical.

    I believe the Bibles undeniable support of slavery and oppression of women are examples of why we shouldn’t use it’s guidance in the case of homosexuality or any other moral dilemma.

    My first example of homosexuality in the Bible is Jonathan and David as described in 1 Samuel.

    Considering my interpretation of 1 Samuel 20:41 is the most contested I will start there.

    Correct translation 1 Samuel 20:41:

    "After the boy had gone, David got up from the south side of the stone and bowed down before Jonathan three times, with is face to the ground. Then they kissed each other and wept together – until David became great."

    The part of this verse most debated is the use of the word “great”
    In the original Hebrew the word “Gadal” is used as a verb and depending on the context that it is used in means “he grew” or “to become great,” (intransitive verb)
    The closest meaning to English would be “to magnify”.

    I will admit, standing alone and out of context this verse doesn’t seem very convincing of Biblical homosexuality.

    It was the way this verse was treated by English translations of the Bible which led me to believe that these publishers themselves interpreted the original Hebrew as implying homosexuality.
    These Christians themselves thought Jonathan and David were engaged in a homosexual relationship.
    I came to this conclusion when I read the various different English translations.

    The first and most contested translation is in the KJV .

    1 Samuel 20:41 (Kings James Version)

    [And] as soon as the lad was gone, David arose out of [a place] toward the south, and fell on his face to the ground, and bowed himself three times: and they kissed one another, and wept one with another, until David exceeded.

    Here in the KJV “gadal” is translated to “exceeded”.

    The Hebrew word for exceeded is not gadal it is gabar.

    I believe the publishers/translators of the KJV mistranslated this particular verse to imply that Jonathan and David’s embrace made David strong instead of making him “grow” or become great.

    The meaning of gabar..

    to prevail, have strength, be strong, be powerful, be mighty, be great
    a. (Qal)
    1. to be strong, mighty
    2. to prevail
    b. (Piel) to make strong, strengthen
    c. (Hiphil)
    1. to confirm, give strength
    2. to confirm (a covenant)
    d. (Hithpael)
    1. to show oneself mighty
    2. to act proudly (toward God)

    In order for David to have “exceeded” the sentence the word "exceeded" is used in would have to define exactly “what” David exceeded.
    In this case it does not and cannot be used in this context.

    Furthermore, Gadal cannot be interpreted as “exceeded” in any context therefore “Exceeded” is an incorrect translation.

    Below I’ll summarize a list of mistranslations in a number of English Bibles to show the length these Christian publishers are willing to twist their Gods word to change its meaning for their own purposes whether real or imagined.


    -"...and they kissed one another and wept with one another until David got control of himself." (Amplified Bible)
    -"and they sadly shook hands, tears running down their cheeks until David could weep no more." (Living Bible)
    -"They kissed each other and wept together until David got control of himself." (Modern Language)
    -"They kissed each other and wept aloud together." (New American Bible) "Then David and Jonathan kissed each other. They cried together, but David cried the most." (New Century Version)
    -"Then the kissed one another and shed tears together, until David's grief was even greater than Jonathan's." (Revised English Bible)
    -"...and they kissed one another and wept with one another until David recovered himself." (Revised Standard Version)

    http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bmar.htm

    It seems The Living Bible couldn’t restrain it’s homophobia enough to even allow a kiss between the two.
    It has them shaking hands.

    The KJV translation could be an honest error but these last are obviously purposely mistranslated.
    If this was not done to “hide” the implication of homosexuality then I would ask those who disagree with me to submit some sort of reasoning for it before they bother to disagree.

    This verse is not the only statement that supports a homosexual relationship between David and Jonathan in this tale, there is much more that I will go into perhaps tomorrow.

    I am not implying that there was a physical relationship between the two as there is no verse to support it as fact.

    What I am implying is that this story clearly tells a tale of a relationship that is far more intimate and emotional than that of two heterosexual friends.

    I am not a Hebrew scholar and have relied heavily on the work of others for this little post so if anyone sees anything that is incorrect please explain it to me and I wil correct or retract it.

    Biblical Reference
    http://www.blueletterbible.org/
    http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bmar.htm

    Definition of Semitic languages
    http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Semitic_languages
    http://www.jcsm.org/StudyCenter/kjvstrongs/STRHEB14.htm#S1431
    http://www.biblestudytools.net/Lexicons/Hebrew/
     
  2. Mister Emu

    Mister Emu Emu Extraordinaire
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Messages:
    11,583
    Ratings:
    +1,344
    Religion:
    Christian
    A completley literal translation would be.(Using www.blueletterbible.com)

    A lad left, David arose near the south, fell on his face to the ground and bowed three times and kissed a friend and cried with a friend,(this is the part where I need to learn ancient Hebrew) David great.(using the concordance at www.blueletterbible.com the word "until" does not come from the Hebrew)
     
  3. Jose Dillano

    Jose Dillano New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Messages:
    8
    Ratings:
    +0
    If kissing one another is a homosexual act then certain cultures in the world would have their men as homosexuals. What is prohibited by God is sexual intercourse between the same sex, because this is not how he planned it to be.
     
  4. Pah

    Pah Uber all member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2004
    Messages:
    13,000
    Ratings:
    +1,056
    Sorry, Jose. God planned his creation and his creation is full of diverse sexuality including homosexual sex. We are just one of his species that practise it.

    -pah-
     
  5. Feathers in Hair

    Feathers in Hair World's Tallest Hobbit

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    14,599
    Ratings:
    +1,793
    [sarcasm] Wait, you're saying god wouldn't have put the possibility of being gay in our mental/ physical processes unless they loved everyone equally, implying that s/he's infallible and actually knows what they're doing?! Blasphemer, Pah! *tsk, tsk* My brain simply won't wrap around the concept! We obviously must know better than any creator that loved us enough to provide us with an infinite diversity of life! [/sarcasm]

    Okay, I shouldn't be allowed to post with the flu. And I just covered all of my HTML knowledge in one post. How sad is that?
     
  6. linwood

    linwood Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,048
    Ratings:
    +861
    Since there has been no disagreement with my previous post I will continue with my line of thought on the relationship between David & Jonathan in 1and 2 Samuel.

    There has been much discussion in this forum about the reason for marriage and the purpose of sex.

    Most Christians have shown a belief that sex is merely for procreation and marriage is a spiritual bond between a man and woman.

    Non-believers seem to believe that one main purpose of sex is to strengthen the bond between two people regardless of their matrimonial standing while marriage is mostly (but not entirely) a proclamation of lifelong love, fidelity, partnership, and respect.

    The following verses may be a bit of food for thought in that topic.

    1 Sam 18:1
    “And it came to pass, when he had made an end of speaking unto Saul that the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul.”

    1 Sam 18:3
    “Then Jonathan and David made a covenant, because he loved him as his own
    soul.

    1 Sam 20:17
    “And Jonathan caused David to swear again, because he loved him: for he loved him as he loved his own soul.”

    The passages above are often misconstrued as relating to love of the physical kind especially by comparison of 1 Sam 18:1 with other references that illustrate love or marriage between a man and a woman as “cleaving” or becoming one as in Genesis.

    Genesis 2:24
    “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh”

    However, I believe this is a false interpretation as I can find no reference for a “spiritual” or “soul” binding between a man and woman .

    The binding, melding or “becoming one” between man and woman is always of the flesh.
    It is apparent that the male characters of the Bible did not think women worthy of a spiritual bond.
    This type of bonding only appears in the spiritual sense and never between a man and woman.
    Biblical men only “become one” with Biblical women in a physical sense IE: “of the flesh”

    This is the reason I interpret these verses to mean David and Jonathan had a strong “spiritual” bond and nothing more.
    However I must note that this bond mentioned in the passages above is incomparable to any other male/male bond I know of in the Bible.
    The expressed intent of the verses leads one to believe that this spiritual bond is far more intimate than your typical male bonding, even when considered on a spiritual level.

    David and Jonathan are more than just “friends”.

    Below is what I’d call odd behavior for a Biblical hero.

    1 Sam 18:4
    “And Jonathan stripped himself of the robe that was upon him, and gave it to David, and his garments, even to his sword, and to his bow, and to his girdle.”

    I haven’t referenced men exposing themselves to other men in the Bible so someone please point me to any reference however trivial it may be.
    Please remember that David held a much lower social status or class than Jonathan.
    Jonathan was the king’s son while David was merely a lauded warrior.
    With this in mind Jonathans naked submission of himself to David becomes symbolic of a relationship that was far more than simply friendship.

    This is odd because when taken in context with the surrounding verses here is how we get to the above verse.

    18:1 David and Jonathan “became one” soul/spirit.
    18:2 David moved into Jonathan’s house.
    18:3 David and Jonathan made a covenant with one another because of their love..
    18:4 Jonathan “sealed” this covenant by presenting himself nude before David.
    18:5 David started acting like he was one of the family.

    I don’t know about anyone else but this pretty much describes my wedding night.

    What type of covenant can be sealed by submitting oneself in the nude?
    I do not believe this is an outrageous interpretation of this tale.

    The verse below is interesting yet it has many possible connotations and I have not had time to study all its possible meanings as of yet but it sure sounds intriguing doesn’t it?

    1 Sam 20:30
    “Then Saul's anger was kindled against Jonathan, and he said unto him, Thou son of the perverse rebellious woman, do not I know that thou hast chosen the son of Jesse to thine own confusion, and unto the confusion of thy mother's nakedness?”

    It must be known that this verse occurs after Saul (Jonathans father, the king) has become jealous of David’s military achievements and his popularity with the people.
    Saul has plotted to kill or control David at this point.
    David has told Jonathan that he believes Saul wants him dead and gone into hiding.
    This verse is Saul’s reaction after Jonathan tells him he allowed David to go home for Passover.

    There are some possible interpretations I could use some help with here.

    1- In what way has Jonathan “chosen” David( son of Jesse)?
    He hasn’t chosen him “over” his father (Saul) so I don’t believe it could be yet more jealousy.
    He hasn’t chosen him over his faith since his relationship with David has done nothing but strengthen his faith.
    It seems possible to me Saul is angered over Jonathans possible physical relationship with David considering it is against Judaic law.
    The equating of Jonathans “confusion” with his mothers “perversion” seems to strengthen this interpretation.
    Biblical perversion is usually related to some physical act.

    2- The word “confusion” here may be synonymous with “shame” which would make sense if considered against Judaic law about seeing your mothers’ nakedness.

    But if that is the case I find it difficult to understand Sauls concern for the honor of a woman he deems “perverse”.

    I’m unsure, any help?

    After Jonathan and Saul are killed in battle David mourns Jonathan’s death .

    2 Sam 1:26
    “I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant hast thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women.”

    As I mentioned earlier common male/male bonds are not comparable to female/male bonds in the Bible.
    Nowhere can I find a reference where brotherly male/male love is ever compared to physical female/male love.
    The love or bond between men and women is always physical.

    Another consideration is the fact that men didn’t share a spiritual love with women so if David and Jonathan were simply close friends why wouldn’t David compare their love to other male friends?
    What this says to me is that David felt their bond surpassed the love of women because it wasn’t just physical but spiritual as well.

    I believe when analyzed it is a bit unclear as to whether or not David and Jonathan actually engaged in physical love although this is evidence of it.

    The one thing that I believe is perfectly clear is that David and Jonathan did not merely love each other.
    David and Jonathan were “In love” with each other, and that is what takes this relationship into bisexual territory.

    I encourage everyone to read this story 1 Samuel and 2 Samuel as it is one of the few I find enjoyable in the Bible.

    You can make up your own minds that way.

    Again I welcome any critique of my interpretation as long as it is logically sound and has some basis of reference within the Bible itself.
    I will correct any errors or retract the interpretation entirely if the weight of the evidence demands I do so.

    Biblical Reference
    http://www.blueletterbible.org/
    http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bmar.htm
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. linwood

    linwood Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,048
    Ratings:
    +861
    I don`t base my interpretation on the act of kissing in this tale.

    I base it on the level of intimacy and comparisons to male/female love.
     
  8. Jose Dillano

    Jose Dillano New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Messages:
    8
    Ratings:
    +0
    Level of intimacy? The way I see it is that we have a tendency to base David and Jonathan's level of intimacy on our present day benchmark. Nowadays it is quite unlikely that a person would give such high, but not perversed, level of affection for his fellow men. We should not look at things that happened so many years ago and base it on present preconceptions, now that same sex relationships are out in the open. When we imply things out of scenarios, our statement would be in doubt.

    Yes, David and Jonathan are two men that kissed. All men that are kissing are homosexuals
    Therefore, David and Jonathan are homosexuals? The generalization of men kissing as homosexuals is doubtful. Unless we could prove that all men that kissed are homosexuals.

    There is not even a statement from the Bible that they are homosexuals. We derive from behavior that is a very complex human phenomenon. And again, many factors contribute to behavior. Emotions may contribute to it, but deriving the intimacy of emotions out of our opinion would render our conclusions as subjective. And our prejudices are molded by almost the same factors that mold behavior. A Japanese closed his eye while listening to you, because that is the way he believes he could listen to you. We may feel offended because our prejudice say that the closing of the eyes means that they are not interested on listening.

    I stay on the fact that no statement in the Bible was made that David and Jonathan are homosexuals. They kissed yes, but we could not generalize. What is certain is that God prohibited sexual acts between same genders and hates these kind of acts (Romans 1:26-27). And this is stated and not derived that they shall receive punishment.
     
  9. Michelle

    Michelle We are all related

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2004
    Messages:
    141
    Ratings:
    +11
    Unless your faith considers Paul the Son of God all you have shown is that Paul thinks that God prohibited sexual acts. Paul is also quoted in Romans 1: 31-32

    31they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

    I suppose that influenced Jimmy Swaggart to say : "I'm trying to find the correct name for it ... this utter absolute, asinine, idiotic stupidity of men marrying men. ... I've never seen a man in my life I wanted to marry. And I'm gonna be blunt and plain; if one ever looks at me like that, I'm gonna kill him and tell God he died."

    http://www.365gay.com/newscon04/09/092004swaggart.htm


    1 Corinthians 4

    14I am not writing this to shame you, but to warn you, as my dear children. 15Even though you have ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel. 16Therefore I urge you to imitate me..

    I suppose this is where Jimmy Swaggart got the authorithy to kill gays in Pual's name.

    1 Corinthians 11

    4Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head.

    ummm well whatever.

    6If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head.

    Its getting harder and harder for me to think that Paul knows what God wants.

    8For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; 9neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.

    That's it...From this day forth I refuse to accept any of Paul's teaching as Inspired by God. He has lost any and all credibilty on this verse.

    13Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered?

    Which church do you go to anyhoo? Or is this a verse that your church has decided that God only meant until the 20th century.


    14Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him,
    Ummm didn't Jesus have long hair?


    Paul was just a man that had opinions and in many cases his opinion is laughable.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. linwood

    linwood Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,048
    Ratings:
    +861
    I didn`t present this tale on present day conceptions.
    In fact the only point of reference I used to determine what was "normal" behaviour for this time was the bible itself.
    Please show me where I`ve compared this tale to any standard other than what existed in the book itself.


    Again..please show me where I based even the slightest bit of my interpretation their kissing?
    I never mentioned their kissing nor made any implication of it whatsoever.
    I merely posted the verse in the many different purposely twisted translations the I found.

    It`s odd that you should admonish my view over something I never even mention.
    Maybe your subconscience is speaking to you.
    :)

     
  11. Michelle

    Michelle We are all related

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2004
    Messages:
    141
    Ratings:
    +11
    I think that David and Jonathan were lovers . I can add a couple of verses that helped me reached that conclusion that I did not see in your entry or I missed it.

    1 Samuel 18:20-21

    20 Now Saul's daughter Michal was in love with David, and when they told Saul about it, he was pleased. 21 "I will give her to him," he thought, "so that she may be a snare to him and so that the hand of the Philistines may be against him." So Saul said to David, "Now you have a second opportunity to become my son-in-law." NIV version

    20 And Michal Saul's daughter loved David: and they told Saul, and the thing pleased him.
    21 And Saul said, I will give him her, that she may be a snare to him, and that the hand of the Philistines may be against him. Wherefore Saul said to David, Thou shalt this day be my son in law in ( the one of) the twain. KJ version
    (The one of) was not in the original Hebrew text and was added. If we change the ending to Thou shalt this day be my son in law in the twain. Saul would be saying that now you have become my son in law with two of my children. Many scholars think that Saul was talking about his other dayghter Merab, but David did not marry her, and she married Adriel the Meholathite . It appears Saul accepted their relationship whether or not he liked it or not.

    2 Samuel 1:26

    26 I grieve for you, Jonathan my brother;
    you were very dear to me.
    Your love for me was wonderful,
    more wonderful than that of women.

    That verse could mean many things but when you read the rest of the story it helps support the notion that they were lovers.
     
  12. linwood

    linwood Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,048
    Ratings:
    +861
    Thanks Michelle the verse does offer strong evidence for their relationship.
    I left it out because I thought I was starting to drag my interpretation out (It didn`t help..I think I still drug it out)
    :)

    It also seems Saul didn`t have much of a problem with it until his plan was thwarted and then he brought it up in anger..more as an insult.

    I did note it near the end, that was the verse that sealed my interpretation for me.
    Like you said when taken with the rest of the story it fits the context of them being "IN Love".
     
  13. Hirohito18200

    Hirohito18200 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    241
    Ratings:
    +16
    I know this is stating the obvious, the the implications of this would be huge, because God called David a man after his own heart, which would make God accepting of homosexuals... unless David isn't getting into heaven, but I don't find that likely. Anyone know of any full books that might deal with the subject?... cause I'd like to see the different translations of the original hebrew. thx
     
  14. linwood

    linwood Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,048
    Ratings:
    +861
    I could find only this.
    I don`t know how it deals with the translation of the original Hebrew but it offers analysis of the love story .

    I might pick it up myself on my next book shopping spree.



    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0664241859/002-3687215-1600832?v=glance
     
  15. linwood

    linwood Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,048
    Ratings:
    +861
    I`d like to know how common homosexual behaviour was in the time period and geographical area.

    I`m aware it was accepted in Europe at the time and in some cases even encouraged.

    Anyone have any info ?
     
  16. Michelle

    Michelle We are all related

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2004
    Messages:
    141
    Ratings:
    +11
    This thread is rated Rated X due to An adult subject matter.

    2 Kings 23

    1 Then the king called together all the elders of Judah and Jerusalem. 2 He went up to the temple of the LORD with the men of Judah, the people of Jerusalem, the priests and the prophets-all the people from the least to the greatest. He read in their hearing all the words of the Book of the Covenant, which had been found in the temple of the LORD . 3 The king stood by the pillar and renewed the covenant in the presence of the LORD -to follow the LORD and keep his commands, regulations and decrees with all his heart and all his soul, thus confirming the words of the covenant written in this book. Then all the people pledged themselves to the covenant.
    4 The king ordered Hilkiah the high priest, the priests next in rank and the doorkeepers to remove from the temple of the LORD all the articles made for Baal and Asherah and all the starry hosts. He burned them outside Jerusalem in the fields of the Kidron Valley and took the ashes to Bethel. 5 He did away with the pagan priests appointed by the kings of Judah to burn incense on the high places of the towns of Judah and on those around Jerusalem-those who burned incense to Baal, to the sun and moon, to the constellations and to all the starry hosts. 6 He took the Asherah pole from the temple of the LORD to the Kidron Valley outside Jerusalem and burned it there. He ground it to powder and scattered the dust over the graves of the common people. 7 He also tore down the quarters of the male shrine prostitutes, which were in the temple of the LORD and where women did weaving for Asherah.

    The Assyrian religions, and other religions in the area, commonly had homosexual priest. The high priest would castrate themselves in a religious ritual and the acolytes would prostitute themselves to the men coming into the temple. There were other religions in the area that worshipped Baal, and they would perform ritual masterbation in the nude. Both of these acts (prostituion and ritual masterbation) were symbolic in nature as fertilization to their god (collection of semen). As the Hebrews were trying to discover themselves and create their idenity they wanted to seperate themselves from these religions. The laws in Leviticus 18.6-22, seemingly were part of this effort. As you can see in the above verses from Kings some of The Jewish temples were also practicing these rituals to some degree.

    Basically. the birth of " Homosexuality is an abomination to God" is from this period. They were simply trying to stop male prostitudes from having sex in the temple and to stop ritual masterbation.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. linwood

    linwood Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,048
    Ratings:
    +861
    Thanks Michelle.
    I`ve seen other reference to male prostitutes in Temple elsewhere in the Bible also .

    It would seem it wasn`t despised at the time.
     
  18. Jose Dillano

    Jose Dillano New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Messages:
    8
    Ratings:
    +0
    Sorry if I was unable to make a clear point on certain arguments. The reason why I disagree with your use of the situation of Jonathan and David is not because my "subconscious is talking to me". Sorry if I sound challenging your logic. I was just trying to dispel your argument in trying to dispel the possibility of inconsistencies in the Bible about homosexuality. Honestly, the way I understand your conclusions, I am made to believe that you are.

    But I respect your replies to my quotes that I believe an exchange of replies one after the other would be endless, I guess. Now that you have mentioned it, if I would be right, I think that you are trying to prove that the Bible should not be a basis for human standards. As you said "...Bible should have any bearing on how a person lives their life or what society deems ethical." This is plainly the way man thinks when God gave them their first king:

    "(6) But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed unto the Lord. (7) And the Lord said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them." (I Samuel 8:6-7 NKJV)

    I use to think the same way as your are when you said that "There are many "rules" in the Bible that are broken without a care by God and or his followers without any consequence whatsoever."

    Why is God not doing anything about it? You are upset and questioning the Bible that God is not punishing those who commit sin, to include homosexuals. The Bible would tell us this.

    "(3) And thinkest thou this, o man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgement of God? (4) Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forebearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?" (Romans 2:3-4 NKJV)

    God is waiting with longsuffering. He is waiting for everyone. He is giving everyone a chance to change. That is how good he is. Judgement is not ours. We are all equal, all servants of the Lord. And he says unto us.

    "Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand." (Romans 14:4 NKJV)

    There is only one judge for us all.

    "But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgement seat of Christ." (Romans 14:10 NKJV)

    When the Bible says we shall stand before the seat of judgement, how are we going to be judged?

    "I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins." (John 8:24 NKJV)

    But all people dies. So what difference does it make? Both the holy and sinners die. so why make the effort to follow God's words. Is death as mentioned here pertains to the death of our physical body? Let the Bible answer.

    "And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgement." (Hebrews 9:27 NKJV)

    So after the physical death of our bodies a judgement shall be made. The judgement of sinners shall come upon them. Could this be another form of death that we shall recieve for our sins. What kind of death shall we suffer as payment for our sins?

    "And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death." (Revelations 20:14 NKJV)
    "But the fearful, and unbelieving...shall have their in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death." (Revelations 21:8 NKJV)

    So sinners are going to suffer after all. They would not be receiving it in this life but they will on judgement days. So continue doing what is right. But you should follow what Christ is telling us in order for us to be saved. Enter his true church. What is the true church?

    And to the one who hates Jimmy Swaggart so much, it is not that only Apostle Paul thinks that God prohibits "homosexual acts" he did prohibit "homosexual acts".

    "It is disgusting for a man to have sex with another man" (Levitucus 18:22 CEV)

    I emphatize on how you feel about Jimmy Swaggart. It is indeed no the right way of treating God's creations (male, female, or gays) as it is said.

    "Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted." (Galatians 6:1 NKJV)

    Peace be with you.
     
  19. Michelle

    Michelle We are all related

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2004
    Messages:
    141
    Ratings:
    +11
    No, I listed some verses that you and your church are not willing to follow. Would you care to comment on them?

    Well we agree on this, however , it isn't Paul or Moses.



    I do NOT accept Paul's teaching as the infalible word of GOD. As far as I am concerned he is a man who wrote his opinions. I find it interesting that Jesus and his apostles never spoke on the subject, only Paul. Also, according to some Bible translations and scholars, even Paul didn't actually speak of homosexuality but of pagan temple prostitutes.



    I posted an entry earlier in this thread showing that they were simply trying to stop male prositutes from having sex in the temple.

    I have also started a thread called Genes Influence Gender Identity showing scientific evidence that Homosexuality is NOT a choice. Here is the link
    http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3725

    Paul had no way of knowing that homosexuality was a natural process of nature and made some bad assumptions . He seemed to condone slavery as well. Many Christian Churches realize that homosexuality is NOT a sin and my hope is that one day this country will believe that "all men are created equal"
     
  20. linwood

    linwood Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,048
    Ratings:
    +861
    But God doesn`t always wait.

    Why does he choose to wait for some as you say and punish or destroy others immediately?

    There`s no reason to it and there`s no proof that he is waiting in the OT only the NT.
     
Loading...